Edwards, NARAL Endorse Obama

Another Middle-Aged White Guy For Obama!

In separate announcements timed no doubt to dominate the evening news, John Edwards today announced his endorsement of Barack Obama. In a campaign event in Grand Rapids, MI, home of the late president, Gerald Ford, Edwards has appeared on stage to throw his support to the apparent front-runner in the presidential race.

He had kind words to say about Sen. Clinton. He paid her several, well deserved compliments. He said, we must come together as Democrats…and make America what it needs to be. He announced that Barack Obama has joined with Edwards’ commitment to cut poverty in half in ten years, according to the plan Edwards announced yesterday in Philadelphia. Edwards also spoke of Obama’s ability to tear down the walls that separate us and join us into the one America that we all long for.

In an earlier announcement today, and to the great consternation of Emily’s List, NARAL has also announced their support for Sen. Obama. According to NARAL’s press release

“We are confident that Barack Obama is the candidate of the future. Americans are tired of the divisive politics of the last eight years, and will unite behind Obama in the fall. We look forward to working with a pro-choice Obama White House in January.”

And they back up their decision with this

Voting Record:
Sen. Obama received the following scores on NARAL Pro-Choice America’s Congressional Record on Choice.

2007: 100 percent
2006: 100 percent
2005: 100 percent

And not to put too fine a point on it, Sen. Obama today received commitments from another 1.5 unpledged delegates.On a day when the news broadcasts would typically be filled with interviews featuring Sen. Clinton, instead they will be dominated by these endorsements. This cannot be mere coincidence. This had to be carefully orchestrated. During January and February, the talking heads and establishment Democrats said Obama couldn’t pull it off and that Clinton was inevitable. Pardon my exuberance, but it seems today, there’s a giant role reversal. Now it’s Obama who appears headed to the nomination and Clinton could still pull it off.

It’s not over yet, and I’m not hinting, suggesting or telling Sen. Clinton to pull out of the race. I can’t help feeling good today after all the crowing yesterday about West Virginia. Even with West Virginia, Obama’s still ahead by 168 delegates (AP) or 163 (NBC).

The next two or three weeks will be very interesting, indeed.

  21 comments for “Edwards, NARAL Endorse Obama

  1. May 14, 2008 at 4:44 pm

    And this right after NARAL … man!

    We love you, Hillbots. Come to the light!

  2. May 14, 2008 at 5:30 pm

    Edwards did the right thing by praising Clinton’s tenacity and fight. I am disappointed that the Obama supporters booed him, it was awful.

    Clinton should stay in the race by the way, I think it’s only fair. She’s fought hard and I believe in her doing that she’s made Obama a better candidate.

    How is that for a silver lining. I posted the youtube’s of Edwards’ speech at my blog.

    http://ellinorianne.wordpress.com/2008/05/15/john-edwards-endorsement-speech/

  3. Eric
    May 14, 2008 at 5:33 pm

    I tend to agree with Rachel Maddow who just said that she believes that Obama held this endorsement until today to specifically cut the news cycle of Clinton’s WV win short. The timing of it and everything allows for it be top story on all the news programs. That inconsequential win is old news now. (Less than one news cycle later)

    …”You are telling me that there was a primary, yesterday?”…

  4. Eric
    May 14, 2008 at 5:35 pm

    As an Obama supporter, I cringed when I heard the booing. Distasteful at best.

    And there is no reason for Clinton to drop out until after Puerto Rico. As long as she doesn’t continue the nasty attacks against Obama.

  5. May 14, 2008 at 5:35 pm

    Eric – Yep, it’s true. Clinton won where?

    And at least with Kentucky, Obama can balance that loss with a win in Oregon. It was very smart.

  6. The Lovable Curmudgeon
    May 14, 2008 at 5:44 pm

    I happen to be acquainted with a handful of PLEOs (“super”delegates). Most of them are not undecided, merely undeclared. They are taking their cue from the campaigns regarding when to announce for maximum media coverage.
    Look for a few more flips (to Obama) and other announcements in the next few days.

  7. Dan Chmielewski
    May 14, 2008 at 5:48 pm

    65 delegates at stake in Oregon; 60 in Kentucky. Percetages between Obama and Clinton in Oregon much narrower than Obama and Clinton in Kentucky. Obama only has 52 percent support of delegates to date; Cliton has 47 percent. The Obama camp reminds me of George W. Bush touting his 3 percent win over John Kerry as a mandate.

    Nice of Edwards to acknowledge Hillary’s effort in the campaign. Obama has done nothing to reach out to the Hillary people at all. If he’s the nominee, he’ll get my vote. But this isn’t over until someone gets the nomination and right now neither of them can with what’s at play down the line.

  8. Northcountystorm
    May 14, 2008 at 5:55 pm

    Well, well, this is a kinder and gentler Heather. Must have finally gotten the Obama memo.

    Edwards is a good guy and given Obama’s big win in North Carolina its fitting that he goes with Obama. Too bad some of the other unpledged delegates like Kennedy, Kerry and Rockefeller didn’t listen the the voice of their people. It was a little tacky to have stepped on Clinton’s favorable news cycle but effective politics and it plays to the talking heads adoration of Obama and desire to see a mano y mano contest .

    NARAL a different story. They carry little clout so it won’t change many votes but I suspect it will do long term damage within the pro-choice and feminist community. Maybe people will go grab God and guns on this one. After all Clinton has done for the pro-choice movement for NARAL not to wait until the primaries were over was the hieght of apostasy.

  9. Eric
    May 14, 2008 at 6:45 pm

    I hate more than anything the absolutely insulting and ridiculous arguments that women have to support Hillary because she is a woman and blacks have to support Obama because he is black. Same goes for black organizations and women organizations. NARAL obviously felt Obama was a better candidate (or realized that he is the nominee). It was a unanimous decision on their part. And if they carry such little weight, why on earth would there be lasting damage among anyone?

    Despite what you all may believe, Obama is nominee for the Democratic ticket. (I understand the technicalities of it), but Hillary is finished. If she wants to wait until after the last few primaries, fine, but she still cannot win. Unless Obama is caught molesting a child in the next few weeks, the amount of SD needed to defect from him to Hillary is not going to happen (even if you distribute the delegates from MI and FL).

  10. Dan Chmielewski
    May 14, 2008 at 8:37 pm

    Eric — with due respect, Obama doesn’t have enough delegates to win before Denver either. Keeping them both in the race is resulting in massive Democratic voter registration. The key to either winning the presidency is how they manage to bring the other side into the fold. I would maintain that neither candidate has a plan to do that and that arrogance exists in both camps.

    So if Blacks are supposed to vote for Obama and Women are supposed to vote for Hillary….

    Who are black women supposed to vote for?

  11. Eric
    May 14, 2008 at 9:45 pm

    There are more than enough SD left to put him over the top. And I am guessing that over the next couple of weeks, there will be a lot of movement. So no, it does not need to, nor do I believe it will, go to Denver. I don’t know what his campaign is going to do to bring the “kyles*” into his fold…and there are a lot of you out there. I personally won’t be helping bring the Kyles on board. I have tried and it has been an utter and complete disaster, because the Hillary supporters whom I have talked to are more stubborn and pig headed than she is.

    Black woman need to vote for Ron Paul.

    *-Kyle is a character by Jim Ward on the Stephanie Miller show who through his own view of arrogance and self-importance will not vote for the other candidate if his candidate of choice does not win just to make a statement.

  12. May 14, 2008 at 10:36 pm

    Eric, don’t worry about the Kyles until after Hillary drops out. Even then, just give them a week or two to lick their wounds. We have time.

  13. The Lovable Curmudgeon
    May 14, 2008 at 10:39 pm

    NCS-
    You might call it “a little tacky.” I prefer calling it “savvy media strategy.”
    Potayto, Potahto.

  14. Northcountystorm
    May 15, 2008 at 8:06 am

    LC—I did say it was effective politics which is another way to say savvy media strategy. But its still tacky. And still effective and savvy. I like Edwards. The endorsement was not surprising given that he tagged team with Obama to beat up on Clinton in Iowa and New Hamshire plus his own change and outsider message and the big North Carolina win for Obama but its still a nice endorsement . Props to y’all.

    Eric- The people who are arrogant and self-important have been the Obama supporters who have been trying to push Clinton out of the race since after Iowa and who are willing to disenfranchise 2.3 million voters in Michigan and Florida. If Obama is going to be the winner, he should be able to crusise through these remaining primaries. While the Edwards endorsement was nice, it does not erase the embarassment of a 41% loss in West Virginia, a swing state. This isn’t over yet. And given your attitude its a wonder any Clinton supporter would even bother talking to you. Try taking a page from Vern’s rap. You might learn something about diplomacy and tact.

  15. Eric
    May 15, 2008 at 8:34 am

    NCS,

    Every Obama supporter I know has gladly said they would vote for Clinton if she were the nominee…it took me a while, but I eventually came around. Every Clinton supporter that I know has said that they would ardently support McCain. So who is arrogant?

    And Obama didn’t disenfranchise anyone, nor did his supporters. Sorry.

    Who cares about the 41% loss in WV. It doesn’t matter. Plus, I believe we are going to see a new red/blue map. And I don’t think WV will matter in the general.

    I have tried diplomacy. It doesn’t work. So I have stopped trying.

  16. Dan Chmielewski
    May 15, 2008 at 8:47 am

    Eric — “Every Clinton supporter that I know has said that they would ardently support McCain”

    You must not get out much or read this blog often; it’s been said repeatedly here that we will lsupport the nominee of the party, whomever that person might be. If you still think we Hillary supporters will vote for McCain over Obama in the general, then you’d be completely wrong.

    Obama’s supporters booed Hillary when Edwards discussed her while giving his endorsement of the Illinois senator. Not disinfranchisement?

  17. Eric
    May 15, 2008 at 9:09 am

    I don’t know most of you on here. I am talking about the people I know, personally.

    Re: the booing. I thought that was distasteful at best and down right offensive at worst.

  18. May 15, 2008 at 9:37 am

    and re. the booing. What was that about 10% of the crowd? Of course it stood out…

  19. Northcountystorm
    May 15, 2008 at 9:41 am

    Eric–Talk about arrogance. Your attitude about West Virginia is typical of a number of Obama supporters and a clue as to why Obama is having such great difficulty right now with working class Americans who happen to be white(as opposed to working class Americans who happen to be black).

    Its easy for you and others to say you will support Clinton when you feel there is no possibility for her to win. Something tells me if she actually won, you’d claim she stole the nomination and would renege.

    And yes, Obama and his campaign(with you and other Obama supporters being the amen chhorus) have at least to now disenfranchised the 2.3 million voters in Florida and Michigan. Take some responsibility for your campaigns conduct. They have to date refused to adhere to the vote in those primaries and blocked a revote in Michigan. They’ve refused to any agreement that would not give them an unearned 50% of the delegation, thus ignoring the vote which means disenfranchisment. I suspect the DNC Rules Committee realizes what a massive screw up the DNC caused by implementing the death penalty for Florida and Michigan. It would be nice if Obama acknowledged as much and supported seating Florida’s delegation and the plan submitted with something like a 59-41 split in Michigan. I don’t care if Clinton supports the Michigan split but its reasonable.
    Finally, if your comments here are any indication of your style of diplomacy I’d hate to see your style of conflict(your last comment excepted).

  20. Northcountystorm
    May 15, 2008 at 9:42 am

    Vern—I didn’t mind the booing. I don’t think it represents most of the Obama’s supporters. Or at east most are polite enough not to boo. In tough campaigns, feelings get raw and some people boo. Bad form, bad taste, but it wasn’t anything that bothered me.

  21. lefty
    May 16, 2008 at 7:58 am

    Senator Obama to bring back usa jobs?

    President Clinton joind ranks with the Republicans & sold OUR union jobs(NAFTA) for business, wall street & their own selfish interests.

    Chinese (communist human rights opressors) gratitude has made them very rich.

    Tears for the Clinton’s? I don’t think so …

    http://news.aol.com/newsbloggers/2008/05/12/good-riddance-to-hillary/

Comments are closed.