With all the attention on who/if Edwards will endorse,

[Blue_In_AK]

can anybody tell me if any of the other former candidates have made endorsements (other than Kucinich in Iowa)? I keep asking this question here, and nobody gives me an answer. I'm just wondering why there's so much interest in who John Edwards supports, especially this late in the game, and why so many people care to the point that they're willing to call him names, "lose all respect for him," and throw him under the bus if he doesn't support their candidate. Are you this concerned over who Biden, Dodd, Richardson, Kucinich, and Gravel support? What's the deal?

For some of us (and it seems that John Edwards may be in this group), deciding which of the final two to support has been and continues to be a very tough decision. Both candidates have pluses and minuses. I personally appreciate that he is giving the matter careful thought.

[MadBadger]

1. There have been no other endorsements and DK has not endorsed either

The reason Edwards' matters so much is because though when he left, he still commanded like 10-15 percent of support, and an endorsement could influence a lot of his former supporters.

[JI7]

2. because he has some delegates and the others don't

[jackson_dem]

3. No other Democrat has endorsed

Kucinich didn't endorse. He made a political deal, not one based on any policy. He said his deal with Edwards was political, not because he favored him. Dennis does what is best for him.

Kucinich, Biden, Dodd, and Richardson have not endorsed anyone. There is not even talk about Kucinich, Biden, and Dodd endorsing and there is some talk of Richardson but that has subsided with New Mexico having already voted. Gravel hasn't endorsed anyone either. He claims he is still running but have you seen him campaigning in Virginia or Wisconsin?

Why is Edwards singled out? Because he had more support (15-20%) than the other candidates combined. His support matters and there are a few who hate one candidate so much while viewing their candidate as a messiah that they are willing to ignore facts. Because of this they cannot fathom why Edwards, or anyone else (Joe Wilson is a great example), would endorse someone other than their messiah. Even Paul Krugman has been attacked by the mob for criticizing the messiah. Krugman hasn't even endorsed anyone and if he preferred anyone it was Edwards, not Hillary.

A new factor that is emerging is the role of white males as swing voters in the primaries. If Edwards hits the trail for one of the candidates, especially in a place hit hard by rethug economics like Ohio, he could make a big difference.

[saracat]

4. Because there is defnately more to this story than they are admitting.

Edwards has a lot more genuine influence than is being admitted. This also has to do with his sudden "departure" I believe you are correct that he is struggling with this. I almost hope he doesn't endorse or maybe says his fire for the convention. I honestly think he doesn't really "like" ' either canfdidate but has come to really dislike Obama in the later stages of the election. Obama certainly got snide with John towrds the end.And John had done a lot to support him.Conversely, I think John leraned to respect Hillary more and appreciate her dedication to detail.And of course she does have "his" health care plan.It would be difficult to turn his back on universal health care as he made it such an issue.
And as the Time article states, I don't think he sees Barack, who wants to "negotiate" everything " especial;lly with the corporations, as much of a fighter.

But he knows neither are perfect and either will hurt him politcaly.And doing nothing hurts to. So it is a question of what will cause the least pain to himself and the people he cares about.

[MADem]

5. No one else has stepped up. They're not stupid. The situation remains fluid. NT