I just read an article written by Joe Trippi in Campaigns and Elections Magazine about what he wishes he had said to John Edwards when Edwards asked Trippi whether or not he should stay in the race.
I have mixed emotions after reading the article. I'm surprised, encouraged, and saddened. Follow me after the jump for more...
Trippi begins his story by telling us that he was given two airplane tickets. One to Atlanta and one to New Orleans. If Edwards decided to stay in the race, Trippi would fly to Atlanta for the debate. If Edwards decided to end his race, Trippi would fly to New Orleans where Edwards would announce the suspension of his campaign. Of course, we all know the outcome.
Trippi explains that Edwards did not discuss his decision with his staffers. He asked each one for their personal advice, separately, and respectfully took into consideration the advice that he was given. Joe Trippi told him to follow his heart, but he says his "gut" told him to tell him something else...
I didn't tell him what I should have told him: That I had this feeling that if he stayed in the race he would win 300 or so delegates by Super Tuesday and have maybe a one-in-five chance of forcing a brokered convention. That there was a path ahead that would be extremely painful, but could very well put him and his causes at the top of the Democratic agenda. And that in politics anything can happen-even the possibility that in an open convention with multiple ballots an embattled and exhausted party would turn to him as their nominee.
He talked about the pain that the campaign staffers felt and intimated that it affected his decision. He was loathe to carry on a campaign that was underfunded, where staffers who had been with them since the beginning would have to be laid off. He was worried about the morale of the staffers that would stay. He was worried about Obama and Clinton calling for Edwards to withdraw. He expressed worry that his dream was only a pipe dream.
He didn't say this, but I imagine he felt that they (Clinton, Obama, pundits, everyone, anyone) would call John Edwards a spoiler.
But he also recognizes that they would have had strengths:
Truth is, though, I did have a vision for the thing. So did Jonathan and others. It was a longshot, to be sure, but there remained the chance of a three-way battle going all the way to the convention. I thought we could make a big dent in Ohio by appealing to middle-class working people. The same in places like Kansas, Colorado and the Dakotas. It was possible to make those a dead-heat for all three candidates in terms of delegate wins. And today, as I write this, I realize we might have had as many as 500 delegates heading into Pennsylvania and North Carolina, two states that would probably be strong for Edwards.
He talks about Obama and Clinton beating each other up, hitting each other with the electability argument, and hindsight tells him that would have benefited a third candidate. He says what is hindsight now seemed like a "wistful hunch" back then.
So, he told John Edwards to follow his heart, to do whatever he felt was right. What he says he now wishes he told Edwards, what he felt in his heart is this:
He could have kept his agenda in the forefront by staying in the race and forcing Obama and Clinton to focus on those issues because he, John Edwards, would hold the key to the convention deadlock. And maybe, just maybe, a brokered convention would have stunned the political world and led to an Edwards nomination.
I was shocked, though, when he said that he believes Edwards might still be in the race if he had said that to him. I don't know Edwards as well as Trippi obviously -- I've never met him. But I'd like to believe that no Democrat wants a brokered convention, that all of our candidates would put the party first rather than go down that dangerous road. I have had great respect for Trippi, and to be honest, I am a little put off by this.
But here is what I found so admirable that I wanted to write this diary. This other statement, almost an aside by Trippi in this article, says something about Edwards character that I think is very important. This seems to be somewhat of a window into his soul:
the senator questioned why he'd be remaining in the race. Would he be grinding out delegates only to be in a position to cut a deal at the convention for his own gain? That wasn't why he had gotten into the race for president. He had entered it to push causes like ending poverty, championing health care for every American and fighting for working people, and it just wasn't him to turn it into a selfish quest. I really respect that, and it helps explain why I so fervently wanted John Edwards to become president. The man cared deeply about those causes, and he did not want to see them tarnished because of a string of embarrassing losses.
Now, that may be spin from a campaign manager. Some will surely see it in that cynical light. But I choose to believe that John and Elizabeth Edwards truly care about the causes for which they fight. I know it's been said again and again, but I really want to see a prominent role for Edwards in the Obama administration -- whether it is Vice President or Attorney General -- a major role where he has the authority and power to look out for ordinary Americans.
P.S. If you prefer a PDF of the article, you can find it here.