Apostropher Endorses

Froz makes the case well in his endorsement of Edwards below, so this one will be a little shorter. I have been on the Edwards bandwagon for a long time. Initially, I must admit, that was based mostly on hometown loyalty. But as I've watched him on the campaign, I have been more impressed every day. This guy has skills. Sick skills. Like I've never seen before. Like Froz, I flirted with Clark and I'm still glad that he's on our side but watching Clark on the stump was, well, painful. You want a guy that can skewer Bush in a debate? Johnny Sunshine is your candidate.

If you think that the "trial lawyer" label is a weak spot for him, guess again. I was here six years ago when Senator Lauch Faircloth and the Jesse Helms machine tried that against him. Edwards responded positively but forcefully and handed Lauch's charred, smouldering ass back to him on a silver platter, smothered in a pink slip sauce. The Faircloth campaign was devastated and never recovered. Yes, he comes off as unfailingly nice and pleasant. But don't think he isn't a fighter; you don't achieve his stature in the legal field by being a pushover.

So that's the electability issue - Edwards is just that damn likable. Even Republicans can find little to dislike about him. In nearly every primary where voting is open, Edwards has won the independents and Republicans. He does well with rural and blue collar voters, groups that have been especially difficult for Democrats to win recently. He can take the swing vote. If he's elected president, I have no doubt he will be a hugely popular president. But what about the issues? That's where Edwards really won me over.

With the exception of the fringe candidates Kucinich and Sharpton, Edwards is the only Democrat running who is talking about poverty. In the Party's race to capture the middle class, we stopped talking about those that haven't made it there yet. And folks, that's what the Democratic Party is about. Or was. Aren't you sick and tired of the federal government existing solely to service the richest 5% of America - the ones who need that help the very least? God knows I am. And as policy proposals go, Edwards was out there first with the most specific programs of anybody in the field.

John Kerry is a good man with a highly distinguished record of service to his country. We could certainly do worse for a nominee than him and he will have my unambiguous support if his momentum carries him across the finish line first. But we can do better, too. He simply isn't inspiring and he is vulnerable to charges of being a weathervane (an oversimplification, but an easy one to make). I agree with Froz - Edwards will have coattails downticket. He is a much more formidable candidate than many people have realized, but that's dawning on them now. I realize how much weight the endorsement of two small-time NC bloggers carries, but there you have it.

Dean is effectively out of the race now; CNN is reporting that he will suspend his campaign but remain on the ballot. I know that a lot of bad blood exists between the Dean and Kerry camps. Dean supporters, I ask you to examine John Edwards. The more voters see him, the more they like him. He speaks the language of ordinary people and he does it effortlessly. Be honest: do you identify with John Kerry? Does he seem like he could walk into your local diner and fit in?

Don't misunderstand me, John Kerry can beat Bush. But I am convinced that John Edwards will positively clean Bush's clock. After the fiasco of 2000, I don't want the race to be close enough for extralegal shenanigans to be able to affect the outcome again. Can Edwards pull off the nomination? You bet he can. I've written here and elsewhere many times that you underestimate John Edwards at your own risk. Now that it is down to a two-man race, it just got much riskier. I'm proud to endorse John Edwards for President of the United States.

Update (12:01 pm): As God is my witness, I thought I had linked to this post at The Decembrist, "How John Edwards Has Changed the Democrats," already. But looking back, I see that I never did. Well worth the read, and the key graf is this:

Edwards is the first politician who, when he talks to a room full of middle-class people, doesn't necessarily seem to be promising something to them. Sure, he's a little vague about just where the line is between the "Two Americas" -- it's "the rich and powerful" and "everyone else." But when he gets specific, when he starts talking about the ten-year-old girl who goes to sleep hoping that it isn't as cold tomorrow as today because she doesn't have warm enough clothes -- it's got to be apparent to any audience that he's not talking about what he's going to do for them. He's making a moral claim about what our country owes to those who have the least, not promising something to everyone who "works hard and plays by the rules." And, shocking as it is, that's a big deal. And it matters that it comes from a candidate who is generally perceived as a moderate -- if only because he's a southerner -- rather than the leftmost candidate in the race.

My sentiments exactly.