Does Edwards *have* to endorse?

[Reader Rabbit]

It seems as if the man's in a no-win situation. He's going to piss off a fairly large portion of voters whoever he endorses, whether they are for Clinton, Obama, or Edwards himself. If he's looking for promises, whether for positions or policies, it's contingent on the endorsee winning. Given how close the race is at this point, I just don't see him taking the risk, particularly if he doesn't feel strongly about it, as seems to be the case.

Right now, he's finally getting media attention for the issues he's been supporting all along. Granted, the "will he, won't he" is irritating, but it is keeping the media focused on those issues. That attention will go away the second he officially backs anyone.

Question is, can he get away without endorsing anyone? Or would that be political suicide?

[jsamuel]

1. It isn't John Edwards' style to not speak out for what he believes is right.

[Reader Rabbit]

6. But that's exactly my point.

He doesn't have a strong feeling that either of these candidates are "right," at least from his perspective. So why would he take such an irrevocable step?

[HiFructosePronSyrup]

2. No.

He's a superdelegate, and most superdelegates are waiting it out to see how the states vote before making a decision.

But I think Edwards is also interested in a cabinet position, and that would explain why he'd want to endorse sooner.

[Lucinda]

12. How is JE a superdelegate?

[Sensitivity]

3. Why does Edwards require a "meeting" to make an endorsement??

Sound like he is asking for some deal. Why can't he do that over the phone?

If he is going to support one of the candidates he should do it based on
the quality of their candidacy, not on the basis of any deal. Isn't that one of the
principles he was supposed to be fighting for -- keeping special deals out of poiitics.

[nonconformist]

9. Maybe he requires meetings because there's a lot to discuss

About his platform, the issues that are important to him, and whether these candidates are serious about including some of them.

He's working for the PEOPLE. Hillary Clinton already said no matter what, Edwards will have a role in her presidency. I don't think he's just bargaining for his career.

[TexasObserver]

4. Only if he wants to get some kind of commitment from a candidate.

[LSparkle]

5. No, he doesn't have to endorse ...

I'm sure he's not happy that Clinton and Obama camps are letting out the word that these meetings are taking place, because if now Edwards DOESN'T endorse he looks like a wimp. He should continue to have meetings like these right up until the convention; there's no need for him to come out and endorse now.

[MADem]

7. It doesn't make him look like a wimp. It makes it look like they didn't give him what he wanted.

He doesn't have enough delegates to have earned the second place slot. Dunno if he'd want to go there again, anyway.

Endorsements don't always help, anyway--as we've seen of late.

[Captain Hilts]

8. No, he doesn't 'have' to endorse anyone. Why should he? nt

[Reader Rabbit]

10. One would think it would be best for him to stay above the fray.

If Edwards avoids taking sides, it would put him in a good position to play peacemaker in August and bring the two camps together for the good of the party. Right now, he could point out the positive aspects and stances of both candidates, and state that both are an asset to the party and vastly superior to anyone the Republicans have to offer. He could also reinforce party unity by assuring everyone that he plans to wholeheartedly support whoever earns the Democratic nomination.

But that probably wouldn't make him very popular with either Clinton or Obama.

[surfermaw]

11. It has something to do with delegates

There are certain things he has to do to keep his delegates until convention time