For weeks now one would have expected John Edwards to endorse Barack Obama. In the Primary debates, it seemed at times that Edwards and Obama were a tag team duo against Hillary Clinton. The Obama rhetoric was closer to Edwards than the Clinton rhetoric. So, what gives — why is John Edwards playing coy?
Well, according to New York magazine’s John Heilemann, it turns out Edwards has already talked to both Clinton and Obama. He started talking to both camps right after he left the race. And his conversations with Clinton were much better than his conversations with Obama. Basically, Obama blew it.
Speaking to Edwards on the day he exited the race, Obama came across as glib and aloof. His response to Edwards’s imprecations that he make poverty a central part of his agenda was shallow, perfunctory, pat. Clinton, by contrast, engaged Edwards in a lengthy policy discussion. Her affect was solicitous and respectful. When Clinton met Edwards face-to-face in North Carolina ten days later, her approach continued to impress; she even made headway with Elizabeth. Whereas in his Edwards sit-down, Obama dug himself in deeper, getting into a fight with Elizabeth about health care, insisting that his plan is universal (a position she considers a crock), high-handedly criticizing Clinton’s plan (and by extension Edwards’s) for its insurance mandate.
The disturbing thing about the article is it points to a lack of diplomatic skill on Obama’s part and makes one question whether he can close the deal and unite the country.
This Democratic contest gets more interesting by the day.
Related posts:
