This week, it seems, the talk has finally turned to what any keen observer has known all along, to what I think all of our guts told us from the beginning, especially those of the most vocal Edwards supporters: This is a one man race. One man and one woman. Hillary vs. Obama, the grasshopper's challenge to his old sensei.
Yesterday, Rassmussen had Obama at 26 points, with Hillary a good ways ahead at 35 and Edwards hanging on the edge of that first tier at a lean 14. Far from mocking the man, I have to express my admiration for him, his run against adversity, bravely taking up the case of the little guy. Like so many before him, he has fallen prey to the allure of the American Presidency, that Egypt to the American millionaire. How many, like Napolean and Hitler, have lost their pride and fortune to this final conquest? Is there no consolation?
[Update!] MSNBC has helpfully pointed out in the comments that it's Napoleon, not Napolean, in much the same way it's Leviosa, not Leviosah. Big ups and thanks all around ;-) -Vince
Well, in fact there is: The Vice Presidency, that jewel of the Nile, not so lustrous, but a fine prize for the aspiring politician. And why not? Edwards was a Senator, not so very great a Senator, and a client of Bob Shrum at that. He's paid his dues. Perhaps it's his turn. But who understands such things, those back room machinations, the smoke and polished leather oppressing the senses...
There is one thing we can all understand though: In a race consisting of one man and one woman, in the end there can be only one. In these Edwards and Obama diaries, we hear such screeching about who is and is not "progressive," but does anyone, outside of her most devoted shills, really believe Hillary, the consummate technocrat and heir to the Clinton legacy, is the "most progressive"?
There may remain here a large contingent of Edwards supporters, but as the numbers show quite clearly, this is but a strange demographic aberration. Everyone knows Edwards, who he is, what he's about. They're not buying it. They ask questions like: Why is this guy running in the first place? Why do I want another slick, southern white male when I have the historic opportunity to vote in either a woman or a black man? What does he bring to the ticket? -- This one is easiest to answer from experience in the previous presidential election: Nothing.
We have here in this election the opportunity to make our answer to Reagan. We can have a dyed in the wool liberal or another go around the Clinton house of fun: Four to eight years of mostly capitulating, not advancing any liberal agenda to speak of, not building on previous gains, not doing anything to undo those the Republicans have made these past seven years and then, one day, the Republicans come back and start up again where they left off.
Edwards ain't making it out of the primary, folks. The handwriting is on the wall and it says the train's left the station. In the coming weeks Edwards and his supporters need to make a decision. Do they cling to a candidacy the numbers tell us can't prevail or do they go to the other guy, the guy they pretty much agree with on everything anyway, but who can actually win. If the former, they need to understand they are voting for Hillary in the same way Naderites voted for Bush in 2000.