AP: John Edwards dropping out of presidential race

Thorgrim · 01-30-2008, 09:11 AM

Democrat John Edwards is exiting the presidential race Wednesday, ending a scrappy underdog bid in which he steered his rivals toward progressive ideals while grappling with family hardship that roused voter's sympathies but never diverted his campaign, The Associated Press has learned.

The two-time White House candidate notified a close circle of senior advisers that he planned to make the announcement at a 1 p.m. EST event in New Orleans that had been billed as a speech on poverty, according to two of his advisers.

The decision came after Edwards lost the four states to hold nominating contests so far to rivals who stole the spotlight from the beginning - Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama.

7online.com: AP: Democrat Edwards ends presidential bid 1/30/08

This makes me happy on so many levels

But to get to the point...may the best candidate win...it's Obama versus Hillary now...they will debate 1 on 1 this thursday, and super tuesday will be a real battle

No "brokered convention" no ridiculous "edwards as kingmaker" crap

I still have lots of problems with Obama, and will vote for Hillary, but if Obama wins the nomination, he will have 100x more respect from me...same with Clinton...because they took each other on like two titans

Whoever wins, fucking deserves it (This assume Edwards doesn't try and "keep his delegates" or some stupid shit)

WickedLou9 · 01-30-2008, 09:28 AM

This is really an exciting election season. The really bad candidates ( IMO ) have been weeded out somehow. Guiliani is gone, Huckabee is essentially gone, it's Romney and McCain and it looks like McCain has the momentum. Even though I am a democrat, I would not be upset if McCain won the presidancy.

And with Hillary and Obama, I don't think we can go wrong either way.

Thorgrim · 01-30-2008, 09:41 AM

Rasmussen does their daily tracking poll, its subscription only...but numbers will be leaked...ofcourse, one-day sampling has a huge MoE, but it will give us some idea where this is going...maybe...it might actually give us the wrong direction...but i want some numbers!

hsmith · 01-30-2008, 09:48 AM

Thank God Mr. 9/11 has dropped out. Worthless assbag. Hopefully he falls into obscurity now.

Amazing how all the media anointed candidates aren't doing so well. Rudy was supposed to win 8 months ago

Spideynw · 01-30-2008, 01:05 PM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

This is really an exciting election season. The really bad candidates ( IMO ) have been weeded out somehow. Guiliani is gone, Huckabee is essentially gone, it's Romney and McCain and it looks like McCain has the momentum. Even though I am a democrat, I would not be upset if McCain won the presidancy.

Really? You would be fine with a president who has stated he would have us stay in Iraq for another 100 years, who is against our first amendment rights to freedom of speech, and has stated he does not understand economics? Wow!

Thorgrim · 01-30-2008, 01:08 PM

Originally Posted by Spideynw

Really? You would be fine with a president who has stated he would have us stay in Iraq for another 100 years, who is against our first amendment rights to freedom of speech, and has stated he does not understand economics? Wow!

exactly, vote for Hillary

WickedLou9 · 01-30-2008, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by Spideynw

Really? You would be fine with a president who has stated he would have us stay in Iraq for another 100 years, who is against our first amendment rights to freedom of speech, and has stated he does not understand economics? Wow!

I am dizzy from all that bullshit spin.
I have news... we WILL be in Iraq in some fashion for the forseeable future. There is no way around it. McCain is telling it like it is.
He's not against free speech, that's just stupid.
And I don't care if he understands economics. If I wanted an economist as president I would vote for Jeremy Siegel or something. The president doesn't need to be an expert in all areas. He needs to be able to have someone LIKE Jeremy Siegel on his staff to consult. McCain would surround himself with good people.

JaJae · 01-30-2008, 01:13 PM

Originally Posted by Thorgrim

exactly, vote for Hillary

Hillary has said over and over again that she's going to leave troops in Iraq. She certainly has no economic solutions, just more problems and taxes. I don't understand your argument here.

Linzyhop · 01-30-2008, 01:15 PM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

I am dizzy from all that bullshit spin.
I have news... we WILL be in Iraq in some fashion for the forseeable future. There is no way around it. McCain is telling it like it is.
He's not against free speech, that's just stupid.
And I don't care if he understands economics. If I wanted an economist as president I would vote for Jeremy Siegel or something. The president doesn't need to be an expert in all areas. He needs to be able to have someone LIKE Jeremy Siegel on his staff to consult. McCain would surround himself with good people.

amen brotha

Thorgrim · 01-30-2008, 01:22 PM

Originally Posted by JaJae

Hillary has said over and over again that she's going to leave troops in Iraq. She certainly has no economic solutions, just more problems and taxes. I don't understand your argument here.

2 brigades a month until only the embassy is protected and we have a quick special forces reaction team in Iraq >>>>>> 160,000 troops in the Iraqi desert

universal healthcare will help put industries on a level playing field...depending on how it's handled it could significantly stimulate the economy, not to mention how it could boost the medical field

Certainly it will put an optomistic mood on the working class...more willing to spend knowing that healthcare isn't going to cripple them or they'll have kids who will be uncovered if they get let go/etc

Spideynw · 01-30-2008, 01:31 PM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

I am dizzy from all that bullshit spin.
I have news... we WILL be in Iraq in some fashion for the forseeable future. There is no way around it. McCain is telling it like it is.
He's not against free speech, that's just stupid.
And I don't care if he understands economics. If I wanted an economist as president I would vote for Jeremy Siegel or something. The president doesn't need to be an expert in all areas. He needs to be able to have someone LIKE Jeremy Siegel on his staff to consult. McCain would surround himself with good people.

We would NOT be in Iraq in the foreseeable future if Ron Paul were elected president.

Cato Daily Dispatch

John McCain appears to have little more than contempt for the First Amendment and free speech generally. He is the principal author of a campaign finance bill that severely restricts political speech. Not content with those restrictions on political speech, he has continually sought to expand regulation to other groups. He has said that he 'would rather have a clean government than one where, quote, First Amendment rights are being respected, that has become corrupt. If I had my choice, I'd rather have the clean government.' Any candidate who believes that respect for First amendment rights needs to be qualified by 'quote,' raises serious concerns. Moreover, his general attitude appears to be that criticism of the government, the war, and in particular himself, is somehow unpatriotic.

As to not caring if the president understands economics! Wow, just wow!!!!

WickedLou9 · 01-30-2008, 01:41 PM

Originally Posted by Spideynw

We would NOT be in Iraq in the foreseeable future if Ron Paul were elected president.

Cato Daily Dispatch

As to not caring if the president understands economics! Wow, just wow!!!!

Yes they would. It's not possible to simply bring them all home right now. It would be a disaster and if Paul tried to do it he would bring about the end any hope we ever had for a stable middle east. Despite what he is telling you, he knows full well that he could not bring them all home. He is pandering to you crazies so you keep donating money.

I don't care what Cato says. I agree with the campaign finance laws that he has enacted. They are good for the electoral process, they very core of our democracy.

The president doesn't need to understand all things about all things. If you want to hire a leader, a diplomat, an economist, a military strategist, a policy maker, a social architect and a politician, go for it. I will pay you a million dollars if you can find someone who is an expert on all of human knowledge.
If the president isn't an economist, that's fine. As long as he/she recognizes that and finds an economic policy advisor who IS one. That is how ALL of our presidents work. That is how it always will be. Welcome to reality. enjoy your stay!

Spideynw · 01-30-2008, 01:49 PM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

Yes they would. It's not possible to simply bring them all home right now. It would be a disaster and if Paul tried to do it he would bring about the end any hope we ever had for a stable middle east. Despite what he is telling you, he knows full well that he could not bring them all home. He is pandering to you crazies so you keep donating money.

I don't care what Cato says. I agree with the campaign finance laws that he has enacted. They are good for the electoral process, they very core of our democracy.

The president doesn't need to understand all things about all things. If you want to hire a leader, a diplomat, an economist, a military strategist, a policy maker, a social architect and a politician, go for it. I will pay you a million dollars if you can find someone who is an expert on all of human knowledge.
If the president isn't an economist, that's fine. As long as he/she recognizes that and finds an economic policy advisor who IS one. That is how ALL of our presidents work. That is how it always will be. Welcome to reality. enjoy your stay!

Ron Paul's record shows otherwise. So no, he is not pandering to all us "crazies".

Not caring what CATO says or agreeing with McCain does not mean it is a good thing: The Corruption of Reform - Mises Institute

When did I say he had to know everything? I am just suggesting one of the most important things for a president to know is Economics.

WickedLou9 · 01-30-2008, 02:03 PM

Originally Posted by Spideynw

Ron Paul's record shows otherwise. So no, he is not pandering to all us "crazies".

Not caring what CATO says or agreeing with McCain does not mean it is a good thing: The Corruption of Reform - Mises Institute

When did I say he had to know everything? I am just suggesting one of the most important things for a president to know is Economics.

NOt pandering?

Ron Paul's Earmarks - WSJ.com

Texas Congressman Ron Paul -- libertarian gadfly and current Republican Presidential hopeful -- has made a name for himself as a critic of overspending. But it seems even he can't resist the political allure of earmarks.
After reporters started asking questions, the Congressman disclosed his requests this year for about $400 million worth of federal funding for no fewer than 65 earmarks. They include such urgent national wartime priorities as an $8 million request for the marketing of wild American shrimp and $2.3 million to fund shrimp-fishing research.

And the thing about economics... that's just your opinion. It's not based in fact. I see no reason why a president should be an expert in econ anymore than he should be required to be an expert in biology or chemistry. That is why a president has advisors.

Spideynw · 01-30-2008, 02:18 PM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

NOt pandering?

Ron Paul's Earmarks - WSJ.com

Hmm, Ron Paul gives money back to his district, money that has already been allocated and has to be spent by someone.

Yet he does not take money from special interest groups called PAC's and he has never voted for a tax increase.

So no, he is not pandering, his record speaks for itself.

kinggovernor · 01-30-2008, 02:26 PM

Originally Posted by WickedLou9

I am dizzy from all that bullshit spin.
I have news... we WILL be in Iraq in some fashion for the forseeable future. There is no way around it. McCain is telling it like it is.
He's not against free speech, that's just stupid.
And I don't care if he understands economics. If I wanted an economist as president I would vote for Jeremy Siegel or something. The president doesn't need to be an expert in all areas. He needs to be able to have someone LIKE Jeremy Siegel on his staff to consult. McCain would surround himself with good people.

thank you.

Pro Street · 01-30-2008, 02:32 PM

looks like I'll be voting for McCain again, just like I did in 2004 and 2000

Linzyhop · 01-30-2008, 03:39 PM

as much as I'd like the progressive "idea" of having the first woman or black man in office, I just don't think they're experienced enough for the job. I think McCain would be better. can't hold it against him that he's a white male.

WickedLou9 · 01-30-2008, 03:51 PM

Originally Posted by Spideynw

Hmm, Ron Paul gives money back to his district, money that has already been allocated and has to be spent by someone.

Yet he does not take money from special interest groups called PAC's and he has never voted for a tax increase.

So no, he is not pandering, his record speaks for itself.

Yeah it does.