On a related topic, see Obama comes to bury Reagan, not to praise him at Daily Kos.

When Obama trumpets "Change we can believe in," he's talking about a complete shift in politics, a shift to progressivism that will last for decades. Because of his broad appeal, his ability to inspire as no one has since the Kennedys (he is older than both JFK and RFK when they died, incidentally), his basic civility, and his talent for bringing people together, he just might be able to win the kind of majority that will annihilate Reagan's achievement. Should he win the kind of mandate that Reagan won, by appealing to as large a swathe of the nation as Reagan did, he could gain the political power that is essential to implement major legislation. He could win the clout necessary actually to achieve universal healthcare, strong action on climate change, equal rights and much of the rest of the progressive agenda.

Here is our opportunity to win a real victory, one that will realign the nation to the progressive side for another generation at least, and finally begin the 21st century.

An Obama victory would be a complete, total repudiation of Ronald Reagan, George H. W. Bush, and his pathetic son, because instead of merely defeating a conservative candidate, it would defeat conservatism.

It's the chance to finally, permanently, bury Ronald Reagan.

Except he just seems to keep getting voters. . .  He's pesky that way.

ahead of Clinton

I am not a voting record expert but I understand that both Clinton and Obama have voted like Edwards and remember that Ted Kennedy was the sponsor of No Child Left Behind.

I would be VERY surprised if any current Senator or Representative crossed the DC beltway to endorse Edwards.

It is much easier to be a "true" progressive when you represent IL, NY or WI vs NC or even VA!

Do you hold the exact same opinions on issues as you did four years ago?

don't mean to undermine your argument, but actually I have remained fairly consistent in my positions:

I protested Iraq the day that Colin Powell lied (unknowingly?) to the UN.

I called congress to stop the Bankrupcy Bill and the Patriot Act.

I've been looking for an alternative trade policy ever since I jumped off the NAFTA bandwagon in the mid 90s.

That being said, I don't hold office. I don't have to run for office every few years. I don't have to raise massive amounts of cash every few years to run for office, and I don't have to face screaming constituents who don't agree with my positions.

There are bigger issues at play than "John Edwards didn't vote like Russ Feingold".  For example, America needs to wake up from the sleeping gas of the VRWConspiracy, and we need to completely overhaul every aspect of our electoral and legislative process.

Still, Edwards needs to win something if he's going to justify ongoing support.  

If you don't win, you don't win.  So, what's Edwards up to?

His message is not directed at enough people for him to win.  Somewhere I heard discussion about this in the last day or so.  What is he up to?

I respect the commitment of the Edwards supporters and their desire for a strikingly new path for our country.

I prefer Obama because his record of public service goes back to the
mid-1980s.  I think Edwards and Obama agree on most things.   In some ways, Edwards and Obama are similar.  I do think it is clear that Obama is reaching more people than Edwards.

you know a lot more about a potential candidate based on how they act while in office than what they say out on the stump. And like Sen. Feingold said, it's not just Iraq. He was the quintesential DLC Democrat in the Senate.