...that I have NO idea what I'm gonna do with my vote. neither one gets it straight off. (although whether either one is going to even try for it is another matter altogether.)

this stupid, stupid fucking country.

Announcement is at 1:00.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

...eff his name is, I'd have let someone else post the triumphant DKos diary.

it'll be interesting to see the continuing OFB reactions, I guess. but then, I always rubberneck at accidents, too.

shit.

!

Let's hope that package means that Obama cuts down on his rightwing shtick, but I'm not audacious enough to have much hope.

He's still on the ballot in Virginia so it gives me one opportunity to vote my first choice.

I agree it's ironic that he gets all the attention now from The Village that he couldn't get before because Obama and Clinton were sucking up all the media oxygen. Personally I hope he endorses no one.

My second choice is Clinton because I can't stand Obama. Either way I'll be holding my nose again this year.

I just don't know. It's going to be a tough week, all around.

Please explain, someone.

Xan, I'm right there with you. I literally was awakened by the news; I use NPR as my alarm clock.

I just hope it has nothing to do with Elizabeth being in any way, worse.

We shouldn't think that the media isn't aware that they are presiding over the political funeral of someone they were only to happy to bring down. On the other hand, I think they're wrong. He's going to be speaking from New Orleans, and I rather imagine he'll go back to the theme of his announcement speech, that no president, no congress, acting alone can make the changes that need to be made to give us back a version of America that a majority of Americans can be proud of and a version of our government where citizens matter, all citizens, whose relationship with their government is a two way street all the time, not just at election time.

I think John will say that his work is not yet finished, and that there is as much to be done at the grass roots level than at the government level.

I suspect that money may have been the decider. To any Gods who might be listening, please don't let it be anything about Elizabeth's health, please, please, please.

I know, I thought the same thing, too (as I'm sure many others have).

I honestly don’t know which way to go.

Pretty much every day, I feel kicked in the teeth by Obama, as I wrote to Farmer in comments last night:

The more I peel the Obama onion, the more I see his calculated disrespect of people like me (personally, and in terms of objectives).

The personal:
* Lifelong Democrats
* Baby Boomers
* Rationalists
* Secularists
* People with memories
* People who are angry at Bush and his forebears

The objectives:
* Fighting the Conservative Movement
* Convincing others to say “never again” to all that’s happened on Bush’s watch
* Having the criminality of the Bushies fully exposed and punished
* Having Bush’s incursions on the Constitution fully reversed
* Making the Democratic Party become more progressive, more popular, and more successful — and not a marginal party with one charismatic triangulator (i.e., not a replay of 1994, when the Reaganites re-revolted because Clinton’s third way didn’t kill or even tame the beast)

The Reagan thing is but one of countless examples, but his “W.O.R.M.” (http://www.correntewire.com/what_obama_r...) moment on Stephanopoulos’s show isn’t just “burnishing the Reagan show biz stategy.”

He is building a fucking monument to the most cherished and valuable Republican meme, that Democrats are the party of taxes and bloat. You’d have to work pretty hard to structure a better picture for Middle America of why Reagan Republicanism is a better brand than the damned Democrat Party:

“Well, I think that, keep in mind Ronald Reagan came in during the 1980s, at a time when, I think, Democrats still dominated Congress, when the view was that we were going to solve our problems, oftentimes, by expanding government programs, and he challenged many of those ideas.”

I understand this recoiling from all-Obama-disappointment-all-the-time, but that’s what I’m experiencing watching this campaign, and that’s what I, for one, am writing.

Obamism has turned into a religion, and that religion is teaching precepts that we progressives know to be wrong (and a zillion endorsements from Democrats I genuinely like don’t change that fact, just like I don’t think their Jesus is the son of God, no matter how many times they say “God bless America”).

How much disempowering shit do progressives have to eat to put a relatively benign guy in the White House?

In my opinion, not nearly as much as he’s feeding us. Even though he’s feeding us that shit with friendly cooing and “here comes the airplane” talk, we need to grab that hand and tell him, as best our little voices can, to put some decent food on that spoon before we’re going to take another bite.

Yet, at the end of the day, I know his platform is comparable to Hillary's, maybe a little better, maybe a little worse. And he's more electable, because he's more charismatic and he's unburdened by the mostly unfair baggage that's been dumped on the Clintons over the years.

I simply do not trust Obama to be less corrupted by the Beltway establishment than the battle-hardened Clintons already are. He’s far more committed than she is to bronzing the political frames that let the conservative movement keep rising from the dead. Like Bill Clinton, Obama’s suit will have a thin coat of Teflon, which is a real plus, but it won’t have much for coattails (unless the sea change that started in 2006 continues full force, and a serious Democratic majority comes to Congress).

I think Hillary actually wants to fight the bad guys, and I expect she’d have some success if she could win. It will be ugly taking on that machine and a hostile press, but she knows what she’s up against.

But I don’t doubt that Obama has a better chance of beating McCain.

So, who gets my vote next Tuesday?! Argh!!!!

The Village. Sigh.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

I think I was so astonished to find out that he was running for Senate as a Democrat, because even in those days, one thought of the career military as automatic Republicans, and after seeing a speech of his, which was very Kennedyesque, I said to my parents he's going to be President one day, and when he ran I volunteered. And this after having seen a life-sized statute of him carved from butter, I kid you not, at the Ohio State fair, (I'd gone to Ohio to work on a documentary of the beginning of his campaign).

I don't think he had the personality for the Presidency, and he was a pretty good Senator, a little conservative, maybe, but he came though in a pinch.

... in an office, when people choose to accept an exit offer. In this case, I'm wondering what the quid pro quo was. I'm hoping there's some policy benefit, and possibly a senior Cabinet role for Edwards.

I have a hard time picturing him on the ticket, after the bad blood between Kerry and Edwards, but I suppose that's a possibility.

My guess is that if Obama wins, Hillary probably isn't his VP. If it's the other way around, Hillary will be pilloried if she doesn't reach out to Obama.

Again, it's the marginal utility** of the last Republican voter (if I have the economic jargon right).

Electorally focused OFB types see the value as high, and the cost of adding one more node to their network as very low (see Shystee's virality post).

Policy focused DFH types see the value as lower, and the cost as high, because of the fuzzing over or concessions on policy outcomes needed to attract them.

Concrete example:

Suppose what was on the table for Social Security was a two-tiered system where those below a certain age got private accounts, as the right wants.

The electorally focused might say, if that brings us to 65%, great.**

The policy focused might say, screw that. We can govern just fine with 55% or 58%, which is a "landslide" anyhow, at least for a Republican. It's not worth destroying Social Security just to gain the extra votes.

"For what doth it profit a man, if he gain the whole world, and suffer the loss of his own soul? Or what exchange shall a man give for his soul?" (Matthew 16:26).

NOTE * Leaving aside the idea that we can get control of the Senate. The OFB say this, but I've seen no evidence.

NOTE ** Googling about:

The "Law of Diminishing Marginal Utility" states that for any good or service, the marginal utility of that good or service decreases as the quantity of the good increases, ceteris paribus. In other words, total utility increases more and more slowly as the quantity consumed increases.

This is "diminishing returns" from the viewpoint of the consumer, and is a general principle of economics. There might be a threshold before the principle applies. For example, the marginal utility of golf clubs might increase until you have a fairly full set. But beyond some threshold, marginal utility will diminish with increasing consumption of any good.

I think for the OFB, more golf clubs is always better. Unity means Unity, ideally 100%.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

Don't you know that frames don't matter? It's all about being elected!

It is a little difficult to know how Edwards could have preservered w/ free media when they did a media black out.

I am sad, but I saw it coming. Super Tuesday requires massive efforts across the nation. You have to have your operation in place while you are running in Iowa. This is why the money primary is so important.

I really don't care who wins the nomination now. I am voting democratic in the general, beyond that I intend to turn my attention to raising my tiny voice to support direct action efforts, like Lambert's great post on AT&T ending with the CEO's address.

Contact me by mail...

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

Once again, America will get what it deserves.

When I woke up this morning and noticed how gray and ugly the day was, I figured it must be because Hillary won our 'primary' yesterday.

At least I got to cast a vote for him* before he pulled the plug.

* - Edwards, not Rudy.

Naturally, all the helpful Obamabots at the Big Orange Satan are recommending that Edwards supporters vote for Obama.

This is all a ploy just to get the media to finally cover John Edwards. When they all meet at 1pm for his press conference he gives them the finger and proclaims that he's still in this fight, and he's gonna win it, media be damned!

That would be the awesomest plan ever. But, WTF can't he just wait until after Tues and get more delegates? What does he gain by dropping out, just run a skeleton campaign with no money or showing.

This is terrible, and I have to assume it is so he can keep his house, which I don't blame him.

They couldn't even leave me the opportunity to vote for a mildly populist, anti-corporate candidate.

Now my choices are Old Triangulation vs. New Triangulation. Sweet.

Xan, I think yours is the best "reaction piece" I've read so far.

As an Obama supporter I'd like to applaud John Edwards and his campaign. He's brought great issues to the debate that otherwise might have gotten short shrift and lately has been a voice of sanity helping pull the party back from irrevocable division. He was my first choice in 2004 and second in 2008.

I'd like to see Obama make him Attorney General. John can do this country a great public service prosecuting Republicans for their crimes against the constitution and Wall St. corner cutting wizards who have trashed the economy.

I think John's temperament as a trial lawyer is suited to righting those wrongs. Resurrecting and depoliticizing the DOJ will be a huge job in the next administration. If he decides to run again in 2016 it'll be a high profile job that'll keep him in the spotlight too.

The Village sees no upside in a functioning Justice Department, and there's no upside for Obama in giving a Presidential rival a platform.

Of course, I'm always willing to be surprised.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

Almost every freakin' liberal blog comments section this day is like watching Chris freakin' Matthews.
"This is good for Obama!"
"No way, this is good for Clinton!"
Personally, I don't give a flying fuck either way.
My guy is gone, and now I will have to pinch my nose tight when I vote in November.
Edwards made a good farewell speech.
The rest is silence.

yes...edwards was originally my choice right after kucinich. i knew it would come down to this, didnt all of us being pragmatic know that? the media machine was pushing the hillary vs obama theme since day one.

i could have voted for edwards with very little hesitancy.

edwards is endorsing obama. stay tuned for another endorsement for obama on friday. i can't say more.
___________________________
.delusions of un mundo mejor.

The pile of disasters is too high for anyone to make them all better, and some of them are going to get a lot worse. Come 2012 a re-election will be anything but certain and the last thing either Clinton or Obama will want is a still-hungry Edwards running against them on a platform of "I told you so." They'll both try to co-opt him with something tempting; for them the safest spot to park him is the Supreme Court, and that's a tough one for a lawyer to resist.

Must find silver lining.

... good independent candidates for us?

Oh, shit, that was out loud.

No, I'm still sticking to the-X-next-to-the-D, but relishing the thought of it a lot less. At least I thought I'd make a vote I was proud of next week....

Well, one thing never changes: the GOP will reliably put up a sociopathic authoritarian asshole that I'll be seriously committed to defeating. They're so resolute, which we're supposed to admire, I hear.

this afternoon was a bit of a giveaway, wuzzn' it nezua?

However I don't know whether to expect it before Tuesday. If he waits till afterward and one or another already has a large lead he looks like an opportunist. If he does it beforehand and the party he endorses loses big time anyway he looks like a schmuck and an ineffectual schmuck at that. Any influence he might have on platform, discourse or issues goes down the crapper.

Donna Brazille, of all people, had a good point about the fact that he phrased it "suspending" his campaign rather than "halting" or ceasing or some other word of greater finality.

In states which are set up so that you vote in a primary for delegates specifically by name rather than for the candidate directly, he still has quite a lot of people out there. Some of them are of sufficient prominence/popularity that they may still win election to go to the convention.

Leaving the campaign in legal suspension (I almost said "zombihood" but that would be unkind) leaves open the possibility that if that satellite falls out of the sky next month smack on top of the scene of a debate and both the remaining candidates are suddenly no longer available, the motor can be kickstarted and put back in operation without having to be rebuilt from scratch.

And it's a polite gesture to those delegate candidates. That's what John Glenn did to me Leah; he dropped out three days before the Illinois primary which was the event wherein my name first appeared on a public ballot. First and only time in my life that I got home and found i had messages waiting from all three TV networks and several independent media outlets wanting to know where I was going to throw my support in the event i was elected.

This turned out not to be a problem... :)

Love to hear the whole story sometime, maybe a post, though I'm in no position to make that suggestion...still I know the way you would tell it would provide both insight and quite a few deep laughs.

funny, VL. :)

and agree, that would be a great story, xan.

___________________________
.delusions of un mundo mejor.

I dreaded this day, but I'm still voting for John in the Primary. Reading the blogs made me realize a lot of the supporters for B.O. and Hil worry about electability. That worked so well for Kerry didn't it! They seem to forget that we are facing big issues and all the happy talk is just that. I felt (having little proof) that Edwards would fight for change. This is the only approached that has worked historically, so what is next? Four more years of eroding middle-class and war?

Sorry, I'm just very, very pissed.

Well, if we're stokin up the dammit pile put another log on for me...cursed corporatistas.It really does feel hopeless sometimes.We know we'll be takin on the fight from the outside now.I hope you're right ,bringiton, and there is a place for a good man somewhere in that house of horrors.I'm going to find my tin can too.

Well, it's always better not being ruled by sociopaths. But the Village is the Village, and as I said above, they're the only winners here.

I'm not sure how much sense it makes to spend any more time on the Presidential race from the D side, at least for me; Obama could still surprise, but it would take something performative (say, filibustering FISA) to change my mind. As things are, better the devil I know.

Rather, savage the Rs and the Beltway Dems as needed, and prepare ourselves for whatever actions we're going to need to take on the policy side of the pincer.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

... whether Mr. Edwards needs help retiring his campaign debt? I made a promise to kick in if he'd take a stand on FISA, and to the best of his ability, he forced Clinton and Obama to deal with it. That deserves some praise.

Doesn't help my mood today; woke up to this news, and almost cried, at lunch. Can't we have a primary and convention season that means we speak up about which platforms and people we want, anymore? No? Well...

cgeye
[my login's been hosed for months]

-- other than FISA and other Congressional issues that need attention, I'm checking out of the campaign swing until August. Neither Clinton nor Obama respect my issues, need my input or my cash, so I'll concentrate on GOTV when the time comes.

At least for me, I won't have to invest any more time on the threads at Kos. Let the dead bury their dead (Luke 9:60).

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.

Sometime I just wonder:

Do these people (aka the general public) deserve any better? If they are willing to vote against their interest even after the last few decades, then what can we do? They know that the media is crass and incorrigible. If they don't know that, then I'm not sure if I believe in Evolution any more.

They have seen the art of triangulation in the 90's. And if they are fooled by the new triangulator, then they deserve it. How much worse can the state of the union get before these folks comprehend what's going on? If they can't get their heads out of the sand and inform themselves of the deception around them, then they don't deserve a democracy.

It's ironic that NYtimes publishes an editorial today criticizing the democracy or lack thereof in Russia when we have a pseudo-democracy in our own backyard. The sad truth is, Russia also learned from the US that you can have a totalitarian state by disguising as a democracy.

Electing another hawk to the white house which is certain at this point is going to send a big "Fuck You" to the whole world and I'm sure nobody outside this country would appreciate that.

The nation is fundamentally going in a wrong direction and teeny weeny bipartisan course correction isn't going to cut it. But maybe one should be optimistic as Noam Chomsky advocated in a recent interview(on CSPAN BookTV) that the government cannot do certain egregious acts as was the case previously. Well it's been a long comment, I will continue my rant later.

FYI, Gleen Greenwald had a great piece today on the Bipartisanship pony at http://www.salon.com/opinion/greenwald/

Isn't it ironic that the year it's finally possible for a woman or a black male to get the Democratic nomination for president over a white male just happens to also be the year when the woman and black male candidates are more eager to fellate our corporate masters than the white male candidates. What a strange coincidence . . .

I think this is the rub: "They know that the media is crass and incorrigible. If they don’t know that, then I’m not sure if I believe in Evolution any more."

I'm quite sure that the average person has no sense whatsoever that the media has been invaded by the bodysnatchers and replaced with pod people. They believe that the only foible of the media is a liberal bias, while if they're real sophistos, they mouth off once in a while about how there's too much coverage of Britney Spears.

In defense of the average person, s/he did vote for Gore and figured out in 2006 (a little late, but still...) that it was necessary to start booting out Republicans, and s/he has managed not to hate the Clintons as much as the entire media establishment worked its butt off to get them to.

But there isn't enough evolution that the average person decided to consider politicians that weren't considered part of the horse race or to develop a proper visceral detest for the bullshit bipartisanship meme.

The ad at the bottom of Glenn's "bipartisanship" post. I don't know if that guy stands a chance, but may Darwin bless him!

Isn’t it ironic that the year it’s finally possible for a woman or a black male to get the Democratic nomination for president over a white male just happens to also be the year when the woman and black male candidates are more eager to fellate our corporate masters than the white male candidates. What a strange coincidence …

i actually dont think its a coincidence. i think due to the systems and structures in our society, a white male is always going to have to bow a little less to get through certain doors. ones that were made for him and his shape to move through expressly. i think you'd see this happen last year or next. until this nation changes a lot, that dynamic is always waiting to be seen by those looking. my take.

___________________________
.delusions of un mundo mejor.

Does that suggest that for minorities to move up in government that they need to be especially accommodating to the power elites?

Does that mean a disproportional number of enablers/abetters like Colin Powell and Condoleeza Rice? Both project having the awareness to be less toxic than others in the administration, and yet both have been parties to the worst of the Bush sins.

I'm not saying I'm convinced of this theory, but I'm trying it on for size and considering what it might mean.

Personally, I'm loath to accept a lot of the "Barack can't do that because he's black" claims at face value, because in many ways we're in uncharted waters, and not just in his candidacy itself, but also in cultural changes (for example biracialism is worlds more accepted than when Obama was born), the degree to which the opposition party has debased itself, and so on. I'm not saying he runs without unique limits, but I think some -- including himself -- may be over-handicapping him at times.

After that, quien sabe?
Hell with the DLC and the village. The media got its wish today: it's a one-on-one black man vs. white woman race for the Democrats.

People, if Edwards is on your ballot Tuesday, vote for him!

This breaks my heart. This is worse than the fucking Giants beating the Cowboys in the NFC title game.

I might be done with the Democrat party. Their best and brightest they kick to the curb; their sleaziest and least qualified, they deify. The DLC doesn't give a thin damn for the US Constitution or the average American citizen.

McCain's starting to look pretty damn good in the general.

It is a sad day. I think Edwards would have swept the floor with McCain...now we have to worry about a country that may be too sexist, or too racist, to elect a woman or a man of mixed-race to the White House. I worry about that a lot, because this is still a very bigoted country in every way there is.

Dems can fool themselves...but make no mistake, this will be a very close race, whoever comes out of the Convention.

Edwards would have made a good president. Maybe even a great one. But he picked the wrong message at the wrong time. And he didn't sell it as well as I thought he could have, often sounding a bit canned.

Although exit speech today was very fine. Had tears in my eyes listening to it. I was going to vote for him. Now? Now, I dunno. I'll probably go for Obama, since I think he may have a slightly better chance against McCain than Clinton would.

Truth is, Americans don't want to face what they've done: elected a pair of genuine rogues to eight years in the White House. Americans are notoriously averse to introspection as a people. Now, American voters just want to *move on.* They don't want to examine what they did with any care. It might make them feel bad. And God knows, there's no American alive, apparently, who can stand to feel bad about themselves for too long.

Let's not forget: there are still over 50 million voters who voted for Bush AGAIN in 2004, when the evidence was clear just what he and Cheney were.

Those 50 million haven't gone anywhere. They're still just as savagely deluded, or just as ignorant, as they've ever been.

It's gonna be a terrible fight, folks. We better be ready.

Had Edwards been the nominee, I think we'd have put them away early, and they'd never have recovered. Now? Now it's going down to the wire.

For anyone who isn’t an Anglo male to succeed politically in this country, they have to try and appear to be one. The challenge for Obama in the general isn’t whether he’s black enough, it’s whether he’s white enough and I’m not persuaded that this Yassuh, Nosuh, Halleluiah Jesus, I sho won’t hurt no fly! routine is going to sell. The problem for Hillary is that in trying to appear manly/strong enough she risks being seen as some sort of ball-busting harridan; rock and a hard place for her.

At this point any move to the Left could doom either of them in the general, I am concerned that the same middle electorate that gave Bush a shot, twice, will find it hard to vote for either a black man or a white woman unless they seem safe and entirely non-threatening. Can’t flat out blame them for being what and who they are because it did get them this far, and I’m just going to have to hope that once elected circumstance and constructive criticism will move them enough in progressive ways to do what needs doing. Half a loaf.

Sarah! McCain? Wash your mouth out.

... is that a candidate that the media will give a fair break to (a heckuva qualifier I know), could do pretty well by being a whole lot more honest than anyone we've seen. I dunno, kind of a Bullworth approach (with, one hopes, better results), if memory serves.

Isn't it well understood by now that both Gore and Kerry's campaigns were too buttoned-down? Maybe the leading Dems could get away with, and maybe even thrive, being a little less cautious?

Please, please, please.

Obama is nothing more less or else than Bush's 3rd term, in a cafe' au lait wrapper.

Seriously. The man is being praised to the heavens by the GOP. Not for his record. Not for his character. Because he's someone they see as one of them.

He has no room in his heart for gays.
He has no room in his America for the poor.
He does not give a damn about poverty, health care, education; last but far from bleeding least he will not end the war in Iraq and he has not ruled out attacking Iran.

Do not be fooled.

Please.

I heard Edwards' speech (Nice Polite Republicans' brief clip of it) on my way home from work today. I nearly wrecked my truck, because I couldn't see for the tears in my eyes.

I only pray it's not because Elizabeth is worse.

As far as the DLC/Obama/Clinton -- they did this to us four years ago when they torpedoed Dr. Dean.
Not another dime of my money, not another stamp, not another minute of my time. I'm done.

"Reagan Democrats" can go to hell, too. They've been the whole reason the media got the foothold to drag our national attitude (Overton Window) so far right so fast that now the nation I grew up in is unrecognizable.

I'm an FDR/LBJ Democrat, a JFK/Jimmy Carter Democrat, a John Edwards Democrat. I believe the American people deserve a President who cares for them, about them, works on their behalf (and no, "feeling their pain" isn't enough, damn it all to hell, so STFU, Bill Clinton!).

I believe that by the time I'm 65 we will have seen a Depression in this nation to rival the one of the 1930s, and I believe the media elites and the political wunderkinds will discover to their shame that by locking the doors against a man of the people who understood that our nation's enemies were not boogeymen in Middle Eastern appearances but corporate thieves and robber barons in plush offices, they doomed our country and our way of life.

I pray that God and the FSM will hold the Edwardses tenderly and lovingly in comfort and strength from this day forward.

We can admit that we're killers ... but we're not going to kill today. That's all it takes! Knowing that we're not going to kill today! ~ Captain James T. Kirk, Stardate 3193.0

One less delegate for the other two is good, and maybe does a smidgeon to keep Hilbama honest, or as honest as possible.

[x] Any (D) in the general. [ ] Any mullah-sucking billionaire-teabagging torture-loving pus-encrusted spawn of Cthulhu, bless his (R) heart.