The Des Moines Register endorsed Hillary Clinton yesterday. They also explained why they did not endorse John Edwards.
Edwards was our pick for the 2004 nomination. But this is a different race, with different candidates. We too seldom saw the “positive, optimistic” campaign we found appealing in 2004. His harsh anti-corporate rhetoric would make it difficult to work with the business community to forge change.
Here’s John Zogby’s assessment:
John Edwards: He could gain the most from the Hillary-Obama drama. We know that John Edwards has honed a very popular message. It worked well for him in 2004, the notion of “Two Americas” that includes an alienated, anxiety-ridden middle class as well…
…His message at the moment of economic populism is probably too hot for the general election, but he can modulate that should he secure the nomination.
The Boston Globe endorsed Barack Obama without ever mentioning John Edwards. Instead, they simply stated:
In our view, the choice on the Democratic side is between Obama and Hillary Clinton.
Apparently, they thought that was sufficient to dispense with the campaigns of Edwards, Richardson, and the others.
Edwards is doing a tour of several of the Sunday morning political shows this morning, so it’s not like the press is shutting him out as it has seemed they were for much of this campaign. But it’s painfully clear that any politician that has the audacity to question corporations’ behavior and influence is going to get bad press and no endorsements. That kind of strengthens Edwards’ message…doesn’t it?
Consider that Washington DC is preparing to hand the telecommunications corporations a blanket retroactive immunity for lawbreaking without even getting information about the details in exchange. And who owns the press?