Attorney General Edwards?

The Boyz 4 Change alliance emerges at last!... maybe. Quoth Robert Novak:

Illinois Democrats close to Sen. Barack Obama are quietly passing the word that John Edwards will be named attorney general in an Obama administration. ...

In public debates, Obama and Edwards often seem to bond together in alliance against front-running Sen. Hillary Clinton. While running a poor third, Edwards could collect a substantial bag of delegates under the Democratic Party's proportional representation. Edwards then could try to turn his delegates over to Obama in the still unlikely event of a deadlocked Democratic National Convention.

That's one way to do it. Another way would be for Edwards to drop out now (or soon), and to not just endorse Obama but to actually join forces with him -- before Super Tuesday. The concept of an "anti-Hillary vote" may be an oversimplification, but surely Edwards could convince a whole lot of his supporters to jump on the "Boyz 4 Change" bandwagon, as I called it two weeks ago when I suggested a similar course of action (though I assumed it would take a vice presidential carrot to bring Johnny Boy along). As I wrote then, "imagine the political power of such a development." Barack Obama and John Edwards, the kinder-and-gentler reformer and the mad-as-hell crusader, campaigning together, promising that "together they will change America. Hillary wouldn't know what hit her."

That said, if Obama and Edwards are essentially already on the same page on this Attorney General thing, but Edwards isn't dropping out, that means one of two things. Either: a) Obama is the world's worst negotiator, having offered Edwards a cabinet position in exchange for Edwards's merely "often seem[ing] to bond together in alliance" with Obama against Hillary (not a very high price!); or b) Obama thinks it's in his best interest for Edwards to stay in the race at this point, perhaps because, as suggested here, Edwards "drain[s] white male votes away from Senator Clinton." Me thinks option "b" seems more plausible (though perhaps not as plausible as option "c," which is that there is no Obama-Edwards deal, and this talk is just that: talk).

P.S. If it is option "b," there's a pretty decent argument to be made for Edwards staying in the race for, oh, about another 24 hours -- long enough to siphon off those all-important "white male votes" in South Carolina -- and then dropping out, perhaps tomorrow night, followed by... hmm... a Monday-morning endorsement splash, perhaps? ... "Up next on Today: the Boyz 4 Change!" ... Talk about a massive infusion of energy into the Obama campaign! And then, with eight days until 24 states vote on February 5, the A.G.-in-waiting would go on the campaign trail for his new buddy and future boss, doubling the pre-Super Tuesday campaign reach of the Obama/Edwards juggernaut. ... I'm not predicting anything, but if it happens, you heard it here first! :)

Comments

[Brian Foster]

This seems like a good time to refer back to this comment.

I'd say that the same presumptuousness-backlash I surmise in that comment, re an early VP pick, would also apply to an early announcement of an AG pick.

[Joe Loy]

"...P.S. If it is option "b," there's a pretty decent argument to be made for Edwards staying in the race for, oh, about another 24 hours -- long enough to siphon off those all-important "white male votes" in South Carolina -- and then dropping out, perhaps tomorrow night,..." [etc]

No. In order to Deliver on the deal, Snarlin' John must stay in, not only through the Super PooperDuper but right on through the end of the primaries in May (to include the Big ones in Pennsylvania and ~ above all ~ in Texas).

Here is Why. Boyz-4-Change ideological compatibility to the contrary notwithstanding, the raw Fact on the Ground is that Red Johnnyreb is not draining crucial Progressive votes from Barack. Rather, he is diverting decisive Caucasian voters (of Both genders) from Hillary ~ and, as time will Tell, not only in South Carolina, nor even in Dixie generally. Rather, Everywhere.

IOW: in a straight-up 1-on-1 delegate contest on & after Feb. 5, absent JohnBoy: Hillary wins. Semi-Proportional allocation systems mean Nothing in a pure 2-way competition. (Yes, yes, there Are the numerous unallocated Party Poobah Bigfat Superdelegates too; but their theoretical inoculation against the contagion of Popular-vote results is unavailing when such Popular choice is the party Establishment's candidate anyway ~ which, in a strict Two-way, she Will be.)

No, Obama will not get Nominated by absorbing the Grapes-Of-Wrath constituency after Johnny "This-Fight-Is-Very-Personal-To-Me" Joad Edwards withdraws from the field of battle. Rather, if the presently Pluralitarian fight goes simple-Majoritarian that way, Senator Clinton will prevail: because Edwards's rank-and-file Troops are not Deliverable on General Jubilation T. Johnny's command.

His Delegates, however ~ IF he stays In long enough & Strong enough to aggregate a Critical Mass of them ~ Will be much more compliant with the Borg Queen's suggestions (but Enough about Mitt Romney :). Democratic rules prudently provide for certain Approval, and/or Veto, powers to be exercised by The Candidate over prospective Delegates seeking seats on his/her Committed slate. Therefore Edwards's will be the elite Intelligentsia of the Movement ~ the Vanguard of the Proletariat, so to speak :}. I.e., they'll follow Orders. [As mostly Union folks, they'll be Accustomed to it. Trust me on this. :]

Thus, future A.G. Edwards can secure his future Cabinet post (and later on, Who knows What? :) only by Persisting in his run Against future President Obama, who will appoint him to it in consideration of his steadfast Opposition. // May God continue to Bless the United States of America :}.

[Brendan Loy]

the raw Fact on the Ground is that Red Johnnyreb is not draining crucial Progressive votes from Barack. Rather, he is diverting decisive Caucasian voters (of Both genders) from Hillary ~ and, as time will Tell, not only in South Carolina, nor even in Dixie generally. Rather, Everywhere.

Is there poll data to back this up? I'd really love to see empirical evidence one way or the other, but I've yet to see a poll that asks voters who their second choice is, or anything else similarly instructive.

[4-7]

how rich - a plaintiff's trial attorney in med mal cases as attorney general.

[Joe Mama]

Heh, the boys at Powerline posit this as a reason to vote for Hillary.

[Joe Loy]

"Is there poll data to back this up?"

Certainly not. If I'm to be confined by mere Empirical Evidence, how then shall I make my trademark Sweeping Assertions? Fie :). It's the Truthiness, stupid :>.

[Joe Loy]

"I've yet to see a poll that asks voters who their second choice is..."

What are we here, fookin' Ireland? :) You just leave the Multiple Transferable Votes to the magic of Electronic tally and don't fret your former Fredhead about it, we're On it. ;>