Yesterday morning I posted a diary calling for John Edwards supporters to stay the course and try to get him as many delegates as possible to help push a potential brokered convention to the left. The idea was to force the party to address the issues he has focused on -- poverty, corporate power over government and lives, healthcare, etc. -- instead of ignoring them under the cover of a nominating process.
A number of folks in comments suggested that the logic was flawed, my least favorite being the sweetheart commenter who said Edwards staying in the race guaranteed "getting hillary lying you know what elected". Others suggested that Edwards had no chance to win, which I conceded in the diary so I'm not sure what their point was.
But now I have some backup from Josh Marshall, a non-Edwards guy who today comes out and said this:
But I don't see any reason that Edwards is under any obligation to get out of the race as long as his supporters are willing to fund his campaign.
And in the case of Edwards specifically, I would say two things. First, as others have noted, his campaign has had an effect on this race out of proportion to his poll support in as much as he's forced the two other leading candidates to grapple with issues they would not have otherwise. And in this race specifically, there is at least a chance we could come into the convention with neither candidate having a majority of the delegates, in which case he might play the kingmaker. Not likely, but not impossible.
It's not likely. But it's a hell of a lot more likely than his getting anything from anyone in the party if he drops out now.
All he gets for dropping out and endorsing either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama is a "Hail Friend Well Met" and some token parting gifts at the convention. Yeah, he might get a good spot to speak for himself if he picks the right one but that's not going to make that much of a difference.
It also assumes that Edwards' supporters would do what he said. Frankly, if he dropped out and backed Obama today I would still vote for Hillary. Edwards is not my leader or my Svengali: he's my candidate for President. I make up my own mind who is best, and so do most of the rest of us. Even if he did endorse another candidate I doubt it would mean much more than freeing up his supporters for someone else.
So there's really no upside for him in dropping out. If he picks the wrong horse, he has nothing. If he picks the right horse, he gets party favors.
But if he stays in and puts some delegates in his pocket there is a chance -- a very small one that depends on a lot of outside conditions -- that he can be either a kingmaker or part of a coalition that makes a king. (Or queen, I know.) As a maker of a king he would be able to demand speaking roles, time slots, platform planks and more that will help Democrats in the future deliver on the promise of his proposals.
That chance, that opportunity, that shot is worth staying in and worth our continuing to back Edwards. Dropping out accomplishes little for those of us who are with Edwards because we believe in his vision. Staying in keeps the vision alive even if it is getting fainter all the time.
If your support is soft for him, that's fine. Go to another candidate and God bless. That's the way primaries are.
But it you really believe that we need universal health care, you need John to have authority at the convention. Hillary, who's biggest failure (by her own admission) was the failure to deliver universal health care, likely would not have adopted an Edwards-like plan without it and surely wouldn't have made it as big a part of her campaign. Obama delivered his plan late, doesn't guarantee full coverage for all Americans, and attacked the other plans for "mandates" for all though his have mandates for kids.
If you believe that the corporate and moneyed powers in this country have far too much control and need to be fought tooth and nail to give power back to the people, you need John to have authority at the convention. Hillary is the candidate of the Democratic Leadership Council, a corporatist organization. Obama wants to give the insurance industry a place at the table to discuss taking power and money away from the insurance agency.
If you believe that lifting people up out of poverty and giving them the opportunity to be full partners in the American Dream of a healthy middle class, you need John to have authority at the convention. Hillary's too friendly with business to really give power back to the unions. Obama is too into negotiating solutions instead of implementing them.
We need John Edwards to have authority at the convention, and Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama and their campaigns are not going to give him that authority out of good will or thanks for an endorsement.
The firm supporters of John Edwards like most that he is willing to fight the entrenched power in our country because entrenched power is not going to give its advantages up because you ask nicely.
There is entrenched power in the Democratic Party, and they're not going to give the power back to us either. They have the power now, they want to keep it, and they hope that we will go away and stop trying to take it from them.
Hillary or Obama will be good Presidents, but while I prefer Hillary as my second choice I really don't care which one gets in. I do care what happens at convention, and how our platform is built, and who gets to speak, and when they get to speak.
This is a transformational time in our country, and we cannot allow it to slip through our fingers. The chance is slim, I admit, but with John Edwards holding delegates in his hands at convention we have a better chance of fighting for our beliefs than with him sitting in another candidate's camp.