Why, why? Clinton is the one who would get done the things Edwards supposedly believes in.

It's good for the news cycle, but I don't think it'll affect too many votes. He dropped out of the race nearly four months ago now, and is pretty much an afterthought.

...in a dramatic attempt by the Obama campaign to answer concerns regarding Obama's appeal to working-class voters, several senior Democratic several senior Democratic sources tell ABC News.

It takes the Clinton West Virginia victory off the news. Doesn't even allow it to stay on top of the news cycle for 24 hours.

Many of you will hate it, but I love it. Not because of how it affects Clinton, but, rather, because of what it says about Obama's political skills (or those of his organization.)

As a pure politcal play, it's great. It takes the attention off of Clinton's win without attacking her, and it allows a Democrat of some standing (the party's former VP candidate) to make the case for Obama without Obama having to do much.

It so pains me to write this, but I have to think he's been promised something - VP, Cabinet post, something; it just defies all logic for him to be doing this otherwise.

And, sadder still, this may be the death blow to Clinton's chances of wooing the remaining superdelegates.

Guess I won't be watching any news - I just don't think I can take one more minute of the gloating and the smugness.  All of which will pale in comparison to watching the Democratic Party just throw away the election, and millions of voters - and for what?

Ultimately it's a punk endorsement. If he cared for Obama he should have done this before North Carolina. Now he gets a probable vice-presidential slot by giving Obama some cosmetic cover. However, Obama didn't expand his Universal Health Care Plan or make major statement on poverty in return for this endorsement.  

We'd like them to be principled, but they're really all just politicians. Yeah, Hillary's health care plan and other policies for the working class are superior to Obama's, and she has the savvy to implement them, but if she doesn't have the DNC's support (and she doesn't), she isn't going to win.

This is a totally practical move on Edwards' part. If Obama should win in November (which I'm still not so sure about), then Edwards will need to have curried some favor. And this is BIG favor currying because it may help Obama a little with blue-collar voters.

Second, will John Edwards campaign in Kentucky? And if so, how do we judge those results? For example if Obama loses Kentucky by 20 while having Edwards campaign with him what will that say? About Obama AND Edwards.

The observation - this is good for Obama vis a vis the Democratic race for the nomination. But what it also is is an acknowledgment that there still IS a race.

As much as anything, what surprises me about this is that rolling out endorsements at this late date means the race is still on.

From Edwards' perspective, I do not see what is in it for him. Attorney General? That would surprise me. Edwards by reputation was a fine civil trial lawyer. It seems to me the job of attorney general is a different type of job.

This is certainly a good thing for Obama in his race for the Dem nomination. I am not sure this helps the Party to unify and I am not at all sure it helps Edwards. Unnecessarily he is alienating himself from half of the Party. Obama's half is for Obama. Edwards is just another endorsement.

There is so much more going on with the vote from yesterday, this should only matter to the Blogger Boyz.

And doing it in Michigan is such a stunt - to try and show us that BO really cares.

This premature Edwards endorsement is inexplicable (and does nothing to change HRC's plan to keep running IMO).

This PR stuff doesn't sway me just as polls don't sway me in that they're not votes that are cast and counted.

This continues to give me concern though:

While Dukakis says he expects Obama will win the nomination, he does not believe Clinton should withdraw until after the last primary. In fact, the former Massachusetts governor says this long tough battle for the nomination may have made Obama better prepared to face John McCain. Dukakis went from a huge lead to a crushing defeat against George Bush Sr. [...] (Dukakis: Obama more prepared for McCain, NECN TV, May 12, 2008)

This is a big change from the positions he outlined just a week ago.

So what has changed? Is it, as BTD suggest above, that the race is still on? Are there techtonic forces shifting underneath the surface here? Quite plausible.

I mean, why else would Edwards be doing this in Michigan.  Kentucky would make the most sense... and Oregon would make sense as well.

This is kinda like when the got Richardson to announce in Oregon -- made no sense at all, with the PA primary coming up he should have done that endorsement in from of Philadelphia's not insubstantial Hispanic community.  But Obama knew he'd lose in PA, and Oregon was his firewall....

Tweety has just put it in context. He says the the Edwards endorsement may be bigger than the vote in West Virginia. Must make West Virginia voters feel like their voices were heard.

Does anyone care about the issues? I was hoping that Edwards would somehow line up with Clinton and pressure Obama to back universal healthcare. That wold have been a satisfying ending to the primaries.

With this endorsement, Edwards only confirms that he is the lightweight I've always suspected him to be.

Makes sense to me!  It's perfectly in line with this "through the looking glass" campaign.  And sniff-sniff, can you smell the unity?

The hillarious part is that John Edwards is fundraising, coinciding with this announcement.  I just received my email.  After sending a very nice nastygram to the return address from the email, I got myself off his mailing list.

June is only a few weeks away.  The fact that he endorsed now, shows to me that he's the twit that the media played him to be.  He can 'make poverty history' without me.

Makes sense to me!  It's perfectly in line with this "through the looking glass" campaign.  And sniff-sniff, can you smell the unity?

The hillarious part is that John Edwards is fundraising, coinciding with this announcement.  I just received my email.  After sending a very nice nastygram to the return address from the email, I got myself off his mailing list.

June is only a few weeks away.  The fact that he endorsed now, shows to me that he's the twit that the media played him to be.  He can 'make poverty history' without me.

Maybe they all intend to stand in the bow, wave their arms & help give the ship some direction--meanwhile it's sinking like a rock.

It surely seems to defy analysis.  Unless you schlurp up a kettle of stupid soup & decide that Mr. Edwards is in favor of hope & change.

Yeah, that's it; hope & change & youth & some other really neat stuff.

The political logic is obvious enough, but for those asking how he could betray his principles....

He didn't. Edwards is closer to Obama on foreign policy and government reform than to Clinton, closer to Clinton than Obama on health care. Depending on what the salience of those issues, and how large a difference he sees between mandated insurance and non-mandated subsidies to buy insurance, it makes fine substantive sense too.

Would Edwards and the others be allowed to tap into the OFB?  I'd bet on it.

Either cash campaign donations as reported by his Hopefund or mailing lists for sale to the elite superdelegates determined to do what is best for them and not for this country.