Why didn't Edwards get the endorsements?

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Maybe it's a little too early for to start discussing "what went wrong" with the Edwards campaign, but the writing is on the wall...

It seems to me that Edwards' biggest flaw was his failure to win any institutional support from Democratic Party leaders.

He was great on the stump, had a real message to his platform, had plenty of money (at least in the beginning), got some big newpaper endorsements, and had a favorable primary calendar.

But while Dean, Kerry, Gephardt, and even Clark were all able to get the support of many influential Democrats in Congress, Edwards couldn't, even after proving he was a contended in Iowa.  I think he had two congressional endorsements outside NC, and no Senators or Governors.  Now, endorsements usually don't matter, but in this case, I think they would have given the Edwards campaign a level of gravitas that was always a little in question.

Most people on the board seem to believe he was the best candidate to beat Bush, and at least some Dem officials must have agreed.  So why wouldn't anyone publically support him.  And if Edwards is such a great "one-on-one" campaigner, why couldn't he convince them?

[zachman]

Edwards had a similar but more low key campaign then McCain did. McCain only had two other senators supporting him, because of the republican establishment prism. Edwards was also anti-Washington and was one of three senators in the race- the youngest senator in the race.

[© tweed]

McCain only had two other senators supporting him, because of the republican establishment prism.

Hagel supported him...and who else?

[Fmr. Gov. NickG]

Edwards had a similar but more low key campaign then McCain did. McCain only had two other senators supporting him, because of the republican establishment prism. Edwards was also anti-Washington and was one of three senators in the race- the youngest senator in the race.

But McCain was disliked by the GOP establishment because his platform was so out of sync with most conservatives.  Edwards is right in the center of the Democratic party; I don't think there was any ideological opposition to his candidacy.

[zachman]

The other senator from Tennessee (not Alexander).

Warren Rudman's endorsement helped. If he endorses Kerry this time, that will sink Bush's chances here in NH.

I was surprised no other senators endorsed McCain after NH.

[MarkDel]

NickG,

I think you raise a very interesting issue that seemingly has no obvious explanation. More Democrats SHOULD have endorsed Edwards and why they didn't is difficult to understand.

Perhaps it's because he looked to be something of a political lightweight at the start of the Presidential campaign. He had been a Senator for just one term and had seemingly decided not to run for re-election in North Carolina because he might have had a hard time being re-elected. Edwards ran as a conservative Democrat in 1998 which helped him win in a Southern state, but his voting record was fairly far to the left which would have hurt him in a re-election bid. In fact, before he dropped out of the race, polls showed he had just a 4-6% lead in his Senate race.

And while I totally agree with you that Edwards represents the mainstream of the Democratic Party, there is a perception among many in the Northeast and West that he's too far to the right for the liberal wing of the party. Personally, I think you're right and they're wrong...Edwards is no conservative...and he's actually more liberal than Bill Clinton, but the Democratic Party seems to have lurched to the left since Clinton's departure, so a Southern Democrat like Edwards may have been a tough sell to the party faithful.

If not for the reasons stated above, I really can't imagine why more Democrats didn't endorse the guy...

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

NickG,

I think you raise a very interesting issue that seemingly has no obvious explanation. More Democrats SHOULD have endorsed Edwards and why they didn't is difficult to understand.

Perhaps it's because he looked to be something of a political lightweight at the start of the Presidential campaign. He had been a Senator for just one term and had seemingly decided not to run for re-election in North Carolina because he might have had a hard time being re-elected. Edwards ran as a conservative Democrat in 1998 which helped him win in a Southern state, but his voting record was fairly far to the left which would have hurt him in a re-election bid. In fact, before he dropped out of the race, polls showed he had just a 4-6% lead in his Senate race.

And while I totally agree with you that Edwards represents the mainstream of the Democratic Party, there is a perception among many in the Northeast and West that he's too far to the right for the liberal wing of the party. Personally, I think you're right and they're wrong...Edwards is no conservative...and he's actually more liberal than Bill Clinton, but the Democratic Party seems to have lurched to the left since Clinton's departure, so a Southern Democrat like Edwards may have been a tough sell to the party faithful.

If not for the reasons stated above, I really can't imagine why more Democrats didn't endorse the guy...

The Democrats votes on electability, and most on that only.  They have the same dislike the Republicans had for Clinton that made them nominate GWB over McCain.  

I don't see why they think Edwards is less electable than Kerry.  Kerry flip-flops on issues, has an ultra-liberal voting record, boring personality.  You'd think after seeing what nominating a young, charismatic, Southern Dem can do for you in '92, Edwards would be a no-brainer.  

[Gustaf]

I think that once Kerry got going many people were still afraid of Dean or Clark winning and went for Kerry to avoid that, not wanting to risk splitting between Edwards and Kerry. Once it got down to a two-man-race it was simply to late for Edwards.

[zachman]

Its Kerry's staff which keeps him in the news. They figured out how to mastermind the system. Edwards' team has not been successful- but the candidate has.

[MAS117]

I don't get why people are always saying that endorsements dont matter. According to the AP right now John Kerry has just as many superdelegates (endorsements) as Edwards total number of delegates all together. Even big Al has 2 superdelegates which is just as many as Dennis has all together.

[zachman]

Kucinich has like 10 now after Hawaii. How does a candidate earn these establishment endorsements, is it the candidates staffs that do the recruiting?

[MAS117]

I'm sorry your right he has 9 now, but pre-Hawaii in which I might add the Congressman from Ohio was the only person to go there and spend money there, Sharpton had just as many superdelegates as total delegates from Dennis

[zachman]

The democratic party should set up an elimination process if you don't get 5% in a primary. You should be allowed to announce skipping 1 primary.