After Clinton and McCain won their respective Florida primaries, both Edwards and Giuliani have opted to drop out the race. I’m not really surprised by Giuliani’s announcement, since he staked his entire campaign on Florida, where he came in a distant third. I’m surprised, though, that Edwards has decided to call it quits since he has a very good chance of playing the spoiler; I figure he would at least stick it out after super Tuesday.
So why did they choose to quit?
Giuliani was a bundle of contradictions, who based his campaign solely on 9/11, which, naturally, made for a good story, but couldn’t be translated into a referendum for the presidency. And there was the question of his character: his divorces, his affairs, and his supposed Catholic convictions. That Giuliani didn’t see the conflicts, or chose to ignore them, did not bode well with social conservatives, and the religious right.
Edwards, on the other hand, should’ve done better. But when he came in third in South Carolina, supposedly his neck of the woods, Edwards knew he was in trouble. Florida was his last stand too, and like Giuliani, Edward lost big. Edwards has the natural gifts of being a great politicians, but unlike Obama, he doesn’t come off as smart and likable, more like arrogant and smarmy. More snake oil salesman, who he is, then a progressive, which he clearly isn’t. But given the see-saw campaign between Clinton and Barack, Edwards was a good position in influencing the outcome, making sure the leading candidates stuck to their Democratic principles; and, yes, even play the role of kingmaker at the Democratic National Convention in Denver.
Giuliani has pledged his support for McCain, who is clearly on a roll. As for Edwards, he’s being quiet for now, no doubt angling for a juicy role. Vice President, perhaps?
Showing posts with label edwards. Show all posts
Showing posts with label edwards. Show all posts
Wednesday, January 30, 2008
Wednesday, January 9, 2008
Political Punditry: Like Looking At Tea Leaves
The only thing I know is that political pundits—no matter how smart they are, or what experience they may have—came out looking like idiots after yesterday’s results from the New Hampshire primary, where they foolishly and prematurely declared Sen. Hillary Clinton politically dead after her poor showing in Iowa, and, not to mention, her misleading “poll” numbers.
Even a neophyte like myself knows Iowa is an unreliable prognosticator; yet the political pundits (you know who you are!) insisted that Obama Barack would take New Hampshire by double-digits. No doubt Barack still did well in New Hampshire, but if it proves anything: it’s going to be a tough primary season between Barack and Clinton (Edwards has no chance), each winning a handful of states, with none getting an outright victory.
It is increasingly looking like a very interesting Democratic National Convention in Denver. Hope it’s bloody!
Even a neophyte like myself knows Iowa is an unreliable prognosticator; yet the political pundits (you know who you are!) insisted that Obama Barack would take New Hampshire by double-digits. No doubt Barack still did well in New Hampshire, but if it proves anything: it’s going to be a tough primary season between Barack and Clinton (Edwards has no chance), each winning a handful of states, with none getting an outright victory.
It is increasingly looking like a very interesting Democratic National Convention in Denver. Hope it’s bloody!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)