From NBC's Domenico Montanaro
Clearly in this debate and in past weeks, Edwards has been the one pushing several issues -- including the lobbying one. He did it today again. Are we too obsessed with Clinton-Obama? And is the headline really Edwards Pushes Democrats? Or Clinton defends lobbyists? Did Edwards perhaps make a mistake even bringing up lobbying because it gave Kucinich the opening to hit him on taking money from hedge funds?
Does any of it matter? Do people really decide on who they want to vote for based on where they stand on the issues and who they most line up with? Is taking lobbying money salient enough to matter? Whose hands are truly clean and pure and then don't we just get super-funded personally rich candidates? And is that pure?
Fact is, Edwards is well liked by the YearlyKos crowd and scored big points as we noted on at least two questions because he has taken the progressive mantle. The question is can Edwards emerge from the Clinton-Obama oxygen vaccuum and what will that take?