The Trail: A Daily Diary of Campaign 2008

More '08 Blogs

Archives

More Campaign '08

Politics Newsletter (M-F)

Multimedia

The Presidential Field

Calendar / Events

Interaction

Polls

Clinton Thanks Edwards for 'Public Service'

Updated 2:15 p.m.
By Anne E. Kornblut
LITTLE ROCK, Ark. -- Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton thanked former Sen. John Edwards and his wife "for their years of public service" following news that he had ended his bid for the presidency. But she said she had not asked him for his endorsement. "I think it is up to Sen. Edwards to decide how he's going to participate, if at all, in the upcoming campaign," Clinton told reporters during a media availability after an event at North Little Rock High School on Wednesday.

Clinton also declined to game the race now that it is just between her and Sen. Barack Obama, sidestepping a question about whether an Edwards endorsement could shift white voters in a meaningful way.

"That is not what this campaign is about. It's about reaching out to voters everywhere," Clinton said. "I'd be honored to have the support of those who supported Sen. Edwards."

Sen. John Edwards called Sen. Hillary Clinton this morning as he prepared to drop out of the race, advisers said, asking her to keep poverty at the top of her agenda as she continues to campaign.

Posted at 2:19 PM ET on Jan 30, 2008
Share This: Technorati talk bubble Technorati | Tag in Del.icio.us | Digg This
Previous: Obama Praises Edwards, Hopes for His Backing | Next: A More Subdued Bill?


Add The Trail to Your Site
Be the first to know when there's a new installment of The Trail. This widget is easy to add to your Web site, and it will update every time there's a new entry on The Trail.
Get This Widget >>


Comments

Please email us to report offensive comments.



Keep up the fight Hillary, we need you in
the white House for 8 years. You have a lot of support. Hopefully John Edwards will give his support to you, he's a good man, maybe he would make a good Vice President.

Posted by: mmecanko | January 31, 2008 4:52 PM

This article was about Hillary, based on stuff from her campaign. They weren't speaking for the Obama campaign, they had no way of knowing who Edwards called, and did not infer that Hillary was the only one he called. The attempt by the commenters above to try to stir up something over this is ludicrous.

Posted by: rpcantrell | January 31, 2008 2:19 PM

It amazing how much the smarmy Obama supporters reflect the smarmy values of Lee Atwater and Karl Rove. Way to go mules.

Posted by: PhilTR | January 31, 2008 12:55 PM

I am a Hillary supporter. I believe that Mr. Obama, although an extremely talented orator, is still an unknown quantity. His ties to republican leaders and supporters are obvious because of his very own statements, although he has attempted to "explain" those statements. You might argue that this is a good thing. The country needs to heal the great divide between the two major political parties, you say. In retrospect, however, you are urged to remember the "uniter and not a divider" rhetoric which catapulted G.W.Bush into the presidency.

With respect to John Edwards, I am in total agreement with Steve Burns' statement. The country needs his talents.

Posted by: arlineo | January 31, 2008 11:29 AM


Hilarious. Bill Clinton falls asleep at MLK celebration

http://talkingpointsmemo.com/news/2008/01/clinton_gets_sleepy_at_mlk_day.php

CLINTON SAYS WE HAVE THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT BECAUSE LYNDON JOHNSON SIGNED IT.

GOLDWATER RAN A CAMPAIGN AGAINST JOHNSON...
SO WHY WAS SHE CAMPAIGNING FOR BARRY GOLDWATER WHO WAS AGAINST THE CIVIL RIGHTS ACT???

BY THE WAY CHECK OUT BILL CLINTON'S RACIST POSTCARD HE SENT TO HIS GRANDMA IN 1966 DURING THE CIVIL RIGHTS MOVEMENT.

http://serr8d.blogspot.com/2007/10/bill-clinton-racist-postcard-buy-it-now.html

THEY USE SCARE TACTICS IN IOWA AGAINST STUDENTS...

THEY USE RACE CARD AGAINST BLACKS IN SOUTH CAROLINA...

THEY USE SMEAR TACTICS IN NEW HAMPSHIRE ABOUT DRUGS AND ABORTION...

THEY USE LAWSUITS IN NEVADA AGAINST HISPANICS...

THEY USE ANGER IN SOUTH CAROLINA...

THEY WILL DO ANYTHING FOR POWER!!!!WELCOME TO THE CLINTONS WORLD!!!

Posted by: laplumelefirmament | January 31, 2008 8:11 AM

I thought Edwards called Obama too. The last paragraph is a little misleading and I'm a Hillary supporter.

Posted by: badger3 | January 31, 2008 8:02 AM

Here is another clue about who Edwards will endorse:

Edwards' top rural advisor, Dave "Mudcat" Saunders saying on MSNBC Wednesday: "I will do everything in my power so he doesn't endorse Hillary Clinton."

Posted by: zbob99 | January 31, 2008 6:59 AM

Edwards will endorse Obama within the next few days. Some of Edwards people have already come on board and many more are rumored to be ready to join Obama as soon as John endorses. The biggest name so far is Senate President Richard Codey, widely considered the most popular elected official in New Jersey, will throw his support behind Barack Obama's presidential campaign on Thursday.

Posted by: zbob99 | January 31, 2008 6:55 AM

John Edwards and Hillary Clinton in fact are much closer in values than Obama as far as caring for the poor and raising up all Americans from poverty. Both Hillary and John have spent their lives fighting for the underprivileged. While Obama was doing real estate deals with Rezko taking dirty campaign money from Rezko the slumlord, now in jail, Hillary and John were fighting for Universal Health Care for the poor, something Obama also does not care about or have in his plan of 'change' America will be strong again when we ALL join together, how would Obama ever accomplish that when he was the one who started all of this infighting among the Democrats with his relentless and careless attacks back in August? Hillary and John Edwards are more mature and know better what America really needs. I don't feel Obama should have ever been ahead of Edwards either. I would have liked to see John at this one last debate at least, he will be missed but hopefully part of the next administration.

Posted by: Hillary08 | January 31, 2008 2:50 AM

America needs leadership not showmanship

I believe Sen. Clinton will provide our country with the leadership it needs to navigate through uncertain times. I believe Sen. Clinton will provide us with outstanding leadership not showmanship. She understands that fads come and go but quality stands the test of time. It was the Clinton's quality of leadership that lead this country to new heights in the 1990's and it is the same quality leadership that will guide us in these uncertain times. I was there cheering when President Bill Clinton first took office with the theme song " Don't stop thinking about tomorrow'' and since that time he never has. One nation under God individual with liberty and justice for all.

Posted by: matthewvaughn30 | January 30, 2008 9:59 PM

America needs leadership not showmanship

I believe Sen. Clinton will provide our country with the leadership it needs to navigate through uncertain times. I believe Sen. Clinton will provide us with outstanding leadership not showmanship. She understands that fads come and go but quality stands the test of time. It was the Clinton's quality of leadership that lead this country to new heights in the 1990's and it is the same quality leadership that will guide us in these uncertain times. I was there cheering when President Bill Clinton first took office with the theme song " Don't stop thinking about tomorrow'' and since that time he never has. One nation under God individual with liberty and justice for all.

Posted by: matthewvaughn30 | January 30, 2008 9:57 PM

This thoughtful commentary from the Israeli media is important in light of the Clintons' racial coding against Obama ...

w w w . h a a r e t z . c o m
30/01/2008
Obama and the Jewish question
By Haaretz Editorial

Not a year has passed since Danny Ayalon completed his term as Israel's ambassador in Washington, but he has already seen fit to criticize Barack Obama, who may well be the next U.S. president or vice president. In an article published in The Jerusalem Post, Ayalon wrote that during his two meetings with Obama, he got the impression that the Democratic candidate was "not entirely forthright" regarding Israel. Similar and even worse smears can be found in abundance in American blogs and e-mail chain letters.

While Obama was taking advantage of Martin Luther King Day to speak out against anti-Semitism among blacks, Jewish spokesmen were using racist language against him, solely because his father was Muslim. Since it is hard to find so much as a single anti-Jewish statement in Obama's political record, or even support for anti-Israel policies, his defamers base their arguments on the fact that his positions on the Middle East conflict are "leftist" - solely because he rejects the right's positions, which are more acceptable to some Jewish-American leaders.

Obama, Hillary Clinton and Republican candidate John McCain have very similar views on the Middle East, and their Senate votes confirm this. ...

The U.S. elections are important to Israel because of the two countries' special relationship and America's support for Israel, whose value cannot be overstated. There is a major contradiction between this fact and a smear campaign against a candidate with a Muslim name, which risks causing many Americans, and especially blacks, to feel alienated from Israel and Jews. Obama is sensitive to Israel's security needs, and he proved this through his Senate votes, his visit to northern Israel during the Second Lebanon War, and his unequivocal statements against both Hezbollah, which violated Israel's sovereignty in the North, and Hamas, which violated Israel's sovereignty in the South.

Obama does not support the return of Palestinian refugees to Israel, but believes that the need to solve the refugee problem must be recognized. He supports Israel as the state of the Jews, and does not accept the view, which has struck roots in the global left, that Israel should be a state of all its citizens, from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea. He speaks out openly on these issues, as he does about the threat to Israel posed by Iran's nuclear program, and he did so even before becoming a presidential candidate.

Racist attacks against a black American candidate could cause Israel and American Jews a great deal of damage - not to mention shame and disgrace. Obama has been forced to defend himself over things such as nonexistent ties with elements hostile to Israel, an appearance at an event at which Edward Said spoke, and praying at one church rather than another.

Great damage has already been caused because Obama announced that an ugly campaign was being waged against him in the Jewish community. That alone ought to be enough at least to make Israel's leaders say something about Jews who preach against anti-Semitism while employing similar tactics against other minorities.

/hasen/objects/pages/PrintArticleEn.jhtml?itemNo=949364

Posted by: Martinedwinandersen | January 30, 2008 6:48 PM

Since someone brought up Kennedy and Kerry. What have these old goats done for anyone. If they are serious about a new generation of leadership why don't they get out of the senate where they have been sitting and boozing and what not and let Massachuttes elect new leaders. They are a bunch of selfish and crooked and immoral politicians. I wouldn't put two cents in their endorsements for dog catcher.

Posted by: tahirn | January 30, 2008 6:43 PM

The question isn't so much who'll he'll endorse as which way his supporters will actually move.

Which way will Edwards supporters move now?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1660

The supporters in our house aren't going anywhere. We still plan to vote for Edwards in our May Primary. Obama & Clinton will have to win the nomination without us because we will only vote for Edwards.

Posted by: pmorlan1 | January 30, 2008 5:52 PM

Hillary lied again. She appeared on TV saying that she held her hand out to Obama and he snubbed it. She was a complete LIE! I saw 4 photos that showed her reaching out to Ed Kennedy and Obama turning to talk with another person. Hillary NEVER reached her hand out to Obama and she had the NERVE to publicly lie on tv, like her husband mind you, while documented photos have caught her lie. She proves the Clintons can't be trusted and she is dirty campaigning.

Posted by: Sis_O | January 30, 2008 4:31 PM

I'm so glad I'm not the only one who was irritated by this headline and the article. Thanks for speaking up!

If reports are accurate, Edwards actually called Obama first, the night before the announcement, and then again in the morning, when he also called Clinton. It's interesting to read the comments made by each of them, Obama praising Edwards for focusing on issues that matter, and Hillary saying she hopes Edwards' supporters will vote for her.

I will support her if she gets the nomination, but it's sad to see and hear that just about everything that comes out of her mouth has been pre-edited for political impact. Ugh.

Posted by: stacia | January 30, 2008 4:18 PM

Sanjaya Obama and his lack of manners towards ladies is his bad luck. Edwards will endorse Hillary because Kerry stabed him in the back.As for Kerry/Kennedy endrsements,Hillary will win Mas.and we should ask Kerry to leave the senate.

Posted by: ashabell | January 30, 2008 3:33 PM

Hillary's statement on John Edwards
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0108/Clinton_robocalls_hit_Edwards.html
Hello, This is the Hillary Clinton for President Campaign.
Before you vote on Saturday, you should know that John Edwards voted for permanent trade relations with China. That"s right, John Edwards voted for the bill that cost thousands of jobs. Like the ones in the textile mills he talks about so much down here.
You should also know that John Edwards made nearly a half a million dollars working for a Wall Street investment fund. A fund that"s been profiting on foreclosing on the homes of families; including 100 homes right here in South Carolina. That"s according to The State newspaper. Here in South Carolina, Edwards says he"s one of us, but up on Wall Street he was just another one of them.
Can you trust John Edwards?"

Posted by: laplumelefirmament | January 30, 2008 2:37 PM

The question isn't so much who'll he'll endorse as which way his supporters will actually move.

Which way will Edwards supporters move now?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1660


.

Posted by: jeffboste | January 30, 2008 2:36 PM

Hillary's statement on John Edwards
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/0108/Clinton_robocalls_hit_Edwards.html
Hello, This is the Hillary Clinton for President Campaign.
Before you vote on Saturday, you should know that John Edwards voted for permanent trade relations with China. That"s right, John Edwards voted for the bill that cost thousands of jobs. Like the ones in the textile mills he talks about so much down here.
You should also know that John Edwards made nearly a half a million dollars working for a Wall Street investment fund. A fund that"s been profiting on foreclosing on the homes of families; including 100 homes right here in South Carolina. That"s according to The State newspaper. Here in South Carolina, Edwards says he"s one of us, but up on Wall Street he was just another one of them.
Can you trust John Edwards?"

Posted by: laplumelefirmament | January 30, 2008 2:36 PM

I hope this is not the last we see of this wonderful man, John Edwards. A man who understands the american people the way he does is invaluable. Whether Hilary or Obama win the presidency, they surely can find a way to use this man's talents. The whole campaign is poorer today in ideas and spirit.

Posted by: SteveBurns1947 | January 30, 2008 2:36 PM

He's leaving way too soon. Hillary and Obama are in the process of eating each other and one or both of them will eventually be destroyed.

Many things are wrong. What the investment bank owned media is doing is wrong. What they are doing with our money internationally is wrong. What they are doing in Iraq is wrong. What they are doing to our soldiers is wrong. What they are doing to our borders is wrong. What they are doing to our rights is wrong. What they are doing to our currency is wrong. What they are doing to our economy is wrong. What they have done to social security is wrong. That we are allowing them to do these things is wrong. John needs to stay to point these things out.

Posted by: websmith1 | January 30, 2008 2:17 PM

Hillary had Little Rock "flashbacks"? For fellow Arkansonians, it was likely of bimbo eruptions.

Posted by: miraclestudies | January 30, 2008 1:55 PM

In other words:

He called "Mommy" to try to move back into his old "Room"!

Funniest part, the Clinton's WANT Him to bring along all his "Friends"!

Lordy, why do I picture the NEXT Scandal to involve an older man, and a younger Clinton? ;~)

Posted by: rat-the | January 30, 2008 1:40 PM

The question isn't so much who'll he'll endorse as which way his supporters will actually move.

Which way will Edwards supporters move now?

http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1660

.

Posted by: jeffboste | January 30, 2008 1:33 PM

Ah, here we go... Edwards himself just said he spoke with them both. Update now, Anne?

Posted by: cmss1 | January 30, 2008 1:32 PM

As with all journalists, unless they can confirm it themselves, they don't want to use the information. I assume she'll update when she can see it, touch it, taste it, smell it and (most importantly) hear it for herself.

Posted by: cmss1 | January 30, 2008 1:31 PM

Anne,

You know just as all of us know that Edwards called both Clinton AND Obama this morning. For you to misleadingly title your piece this way is downright BAD journalism.

Come on now, you're better than that.

The Washington Post is better than that.

Posted by: walterbond | January 30, 2008 1:22 PM

ditto what miked98 said.

Posted by: edhere | January 30, 2008 1:12 PM

Edwards called *both* Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton before dropping out -
this smells like a story spoon fed from the HRC camp.

Posted by: miked98 | January 30, 2008 1:09 PM

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 

© 2008 The Washington Post Company