A beautiful, gracious speech. It was deeply fitting, and for me, affecting, for Edwards' final address as a presidential candidate and national politician to focus on the One America, the more decent, more just America that we believe in, and that he's fought to build. Watching him on that stage, there was no artifice to his claim that he's now forced the other candidates to embrace his passions and adopt his causes. Whatever their assurances to him on the phone, John Edwards set the terms of this race, and the contours of their agendas, many months ago. Here are three articles on what John Edwards meant to the campaign:• First, my column on his role in the health care debate. "[Edwards'] insistence on centering his campaign around a bold vision for health care reform bettered the campaigns of his opponents. It made them more courageous, and showed that a serious commitment to health care reform was popular in the party and viable in the press. If he fails to capture the nomination, but sees one of his fellow candidate's plans pass, he will have helped enact Harris Wofford's dream from over a decade ago: That one day, we would be a country, in which if you are sick, you have a right to a doctor." Whole thing here.• In The Guardian, Matt explains "if he hadn't been in the race we would have missed him a great deal. Indeed, despite his consistently lagging polling and fundraising numbers, Edwards has arguably been the decisive policy influence inside the Democratic party."• Over at The New Republic, Jon Cohn writes, "if Edwards wants to blame somebody for his defeat, he shouldn't look at the media. He should look at himself. And I mean that in the best sense possible. Edwards' biggest problem may have been that he was too compelling—so compelling that his rivals effectively adopted his agenda."And, finally, a word on Elizabeth Edwards. The first time I came to Washington as an adult, I came because she invited me. An avid blog reader, Elizabeth asked a handful of bloggers to come have dinner at their home in Georgetown. I'd just been hired by the Prospect, but wouldn't start for months yet, and so imagined this a good opportunity to visit my new city. I remember standing on their porch, ringing the doorbell only to have John Edwards answer. I remember looking behind him, to the older women with short, spiky grey hair -- Elizabeth, after a round of chemo. I remember John Edwards trying to have us convince her that her hair looked wonderful the way it was, and she needn't color it. I remember the evident bond, and deep affection, their interactions displayed. But more than that, I remember how impressive she was, how quick and articulate and argumentative. It was her, not him, who made the biggest impression on me. He was the politician, but of the two, she was the political thinker, the one who devoured commentary and information, the one who conceived of their campaign as a product of the contemporary progressive moment. Most of the commentary on her will focus on her health, and I pray that it is superfluous, and she is well. But beyond that, she deserves to be remembered as a political force in her own right, as the member of the partnership who made the Edwards campaign a progressive, rather than merely populist, force. A couple weeks back, I sat down with her, in New Hampshire, for a quick interview. In 15 minutes, she said more than most politicians do in 15 days. The transcript is here. It's the best read of any of the links on this list. WHAT EDWARDS MEANT.
A beautiful, gracious speech. It was deeply fitting, and for me, affecting, for Edwards' final address as a presidential candidate and national politician to focus on the One America, the more decent, more just America that we believe in, and that he's fought to build. Watching him on that stage, there was no artifice to his claim that he's now forced the other candidates to embrace his passions and adopt his causes. Whatever their assurances to him on the phone, John Edwards set the terms of this race, and the contours of their agendas, many months ago. Here are three articles on what John Edwards meant to the campaign:• First, my column on his role in the health care debate. "[Edwards'] insistence on centering his campaign around a bold vision for health care reform bettered the campaigns of his opponents. It made them more courageous, and showed that a serious commitment to health care reform was popular in the party and viable in the press. If he fails to capture the nomination, but sees one of his fellow candidate's plans pass, he will have helped enact Harris Wofford's dream from over a decade ago: That one day, we would be a country, in which if you are sick, you have a right to a doctor." Whole thing here.• In The Guardian, Matt explains "if he hadn't been in the race we would have missed him a great deal. Indeed, despite his consistently lagging polling and fundraising numbers, Edwards has arguably been the decisive policy influence inside the Democratic party."• Over at The New Republic, Jon Cohn writes, "if Edwards wants to blame somebody for his defeat, he shouldn't look at the media. He should look at himself. And I mean that in the best sense possible. Edwards' biggest problem may have been that he was too compelling—so compelling that his rivals effectively adopted his agenda."And, finally, a word on Elizabeth Edwards. The first time I came to Washington as an adult, I came because she invited me. An avid blog reader, Elizabeth asked a handful of bloggers to come have dinner at their home in Georgetown. I'd just been hired by the Prospect, but wouldn't start for months yet, and so imagined this a good opportunity to visit my new city. I remember standing on their porch, ringing the doorbell only to have John Edwards answer. I remember looking behind him, to the older women with short, spiky grey hair -- Elizabeth, after a round of chemo. I remember John Edwards trying to have us convince her that her hair looked wonderful the way it was, and she needn't color it. I remember the evident bond, and deep affection, their interactions displayed. But more than that, I remember how impressive she was, how quick and articulate and argumentative. It was her, not him, who made the biggest impression on me. He was the politician, but of the two, she was the political thinker, the one who devoured commentary and information, the one who conceived of their campaign as a product of the contemporary progressive moment. Most of the commentary on her will focus on her health, and I pray that it is superfluous, and she is well. But beyond that, she deserves to be remembered as a political force in her own right, as the member of the partnership who made the Edwards campaign a progressive, rather than merely populist, force. A couple weeks back, I sat down with her, in New Hampshire, for a quick interview. In 15 minutes, she said more than most politicians do in 15 days. The transcript is here. It's the best read of any of the links on this list. 
