Edwards getting public funding means he has problem raising money. With the polls going mostly 3rd for him after Obama in all state primaries, he will be history soon.

He cannot even win his own state, North Carolina. And, he spent a lot of time and money in Iowa, his standing there is declining after Hillary, and will soon after Obama.

We need to do away with any & all dynasties in politics …no matter which party.

For whoever Ed Kennedy puts his support behind will be the one candidate I will not support.

Hopefully he will endorse Hillary since she is the only current demo I wont for too.

Eric - you are 100% right….Edwards supporters…when someone claims that "insurance is too expensive" - then you find out they live in a 35000 sq foot house paid for by suing insurance companies and doctors - do you scratch your heads and wonder why insurance is so expensive….then blame the Republicans…are you comfortable voting along side of people the DNC buses from homeless shelters with the incentive of free donuts to vote for Democrats? Its time to start thinking…don't look to the left nor the right - look to the middle - the only moderate running - Giuliani

How can anyone take him seriously?

Obama v. McCain???…That will be the day when I give an "I report" video to CNN of pigs flying over my house…

As for Edwards, without question the most self-absorbed, pandering, lying and, therefore, dangerous candidate in the recent history of American politics.

Stick a fork in him - he's done…

EDward JUST COME OUT CLEAR AND SAY I DID NOT MEET MY CAMPAIGN FINANCIAL GOALS BUT I BELIEVE IN MY MESSAGE OF CHANGE AND FAIRNESS
WILL U RAISE YOUR KIDS WITH THIS DISHONESTY>

It's distressing the amount of money being thrown around in these campaigns that could be put to much better use. I know we're in a free-market country, but I propose that each candidate gets "X" amount of air time on networks + cable stations. They can either make a vid. or speak live directly to viewrs. Everyone gets an equal amt. of time, so no one can buy their way in through massive advertising. Then, we hold a few debates closer to the election.

Edwards taking public money. What a shocker. I think that a $400 hammer or a $10,000 toilet seat is a better use of taxpayer money than funding this guy.

Another Edwards flip-flop. In February, he said he was not taking public funds.

Here is the link:

http://www.usatoday.com/news/washington/2007-02-05-edwards-money_x.htm

To all of you against public financing, you would rather a candidate be bought out by and represent corporations instead of regular people? Real bright!! Edwards is right, all candidates should take public financing, which REQUIRES SUPPORT FROM INDIVIDUALS and LIMITS THE AMOUNT OF CAMPAIGN SPENDING. You get matching funds, not just a big lump sum check. Maybe then, American would vote for someone based on positions rather than being sheep that vote for someone based on their expensive commercial.

Edwards is not leading on this issue. Obama was the one in March 2007 who brought this to the FEC and already has Sen. McCain's pledge.

Poor Hillary, she's peaked and it's all down hill from here.

Public…financing is a "principled issue".

Well Mr Edwards, for the record I have an LL.B and an LL.M degree, both from Ivy Leagues Schools in the US. As a matter of "principle" I refused the salaries offered to me by American law firms because of signs that are displayed at the door, which all say "LEAVE YOUR PRINCIPLES HERE".

Does this allow Edwards to stay in the race?Is that what this means?

Hillary Clinton is no different than any othe politician, except she has a heart, she laughs, and she has Bill Clinton. News shows will pick her apart, that is how they get people to watch there program. All part of the game. Our country is a mess, and we need Hillary Clinton.

It's good to know Edwards is willing to "take a stand" on taking money from hard-working taxpayers. (For a minute there I was worried he might get his campaign cash the old-fashioned way… by promoting values and policies people think are virtuous.)

This guy us the best spinster i've ever seen. Better than Hillary even. He's going to force her to flipflop here.

Obama already said he would use Public Financing, only if the Republican Nominee agrees, if its Obama v. McCain, there will be public financing, they agreed to it awhile ago.

If Edwards is capped to spend $50m until the Democratic convention in August, and he spends most of that winning a long primary (surely if he wins, it will be after spending most of that money), how will he compete with the GOP after he becomes the de facto nominee. In 2004 the Kerry campaign spent as much "primary" money after Edwards dropped out of the race, as he did winning the nomination, mainly in general election battleground states. This move might make life easier for Edwards in the primary, but if he doesn't take general election matching funds, it would mean he's delegating his general election campaign to the DNC/MoveOn.org until the convention and general election funds kick in?

Sory but anyone who complains about us spending money to fight terrorism had better be really p*##ed at this use of taxpayer money.

There's just something wrong with this policy : An $84 million GOVERNMENT grant given to the candidate who agrees not to raise or spend outside funds.

I understand why the process is in place - to avoid someone being able to "buy" the election - but I can't stand that money we could use for New Orleans, bringing people out of poverty, for health care , etc etc etc. is being given to these hugely profitable conglmorate media companies who already have overpaid newscasters making millions and millions a year !

The reason Edwards is struggling in the polls is because of his tendency to flip flop on many issues and insult people's intelligence. If John Edwards truly is all about public financing, why then did he not accept public financing earlier in the campaign season? CNN should have asked him that question.

Edwards will get chewed and spat out by the GOP machine. The guy has a real credibility problem. The more I learn about him, the less I like him.

OK let me get this straight; media outlets such as the NY Times charge hundreds of thousands for a one day page of newsprint; tv stations charge millions per minute and WE, the taxpayers are paying for rich, elitist candidates to buy their ads?!

Being a slip 'n fall lawyer, Mr. Edwards is the lowest of the low bottom feeder job description and he lives in a gazillion square foot house that takes more energy than a small factory and he pays $400.00 for a haircut and he wants YOU and I to kick in the money to buy his propaganda advertising ?!!!

This is not to be believed.

Quite apart from whatever financial and political calculation that went into this decision, it is a brave one that highlights the role of money in politics.

It greatly increases my admiration for Edwards and makes me inclined to shift my support to him.

Nice example for your supporters, John. When you can't do it on your own - turn to the government for a handout.

“This is not about a money calculation,” Edwards told CNN Senior Political Correspondent Candy Crowley Thursday on his way to an event in Durham. “This is about taking a stand, a principled stand, and I believe in public financing.”

BWAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAHAHA!!!!!!

Funniest lie of the Month. Wow. Lying with a straight face. Go John!

Classic.

Not only does this insanely wealthy ambulance chaser NOT want to fund his own stinkin' campaign (especially after making a career out of shaking down hard working medical professionals… the single biggest reason why healthcare is so expensive today), he now expects YOU, Mr. and Mrs. Taxpaying-America, to fund it for him!

Talk about gall!

This clown is already promising to shake you down once in office… but now he wants to shake you down to help him get there?!!

Like the old Visa ads… Classic!

Way to go…Edwards. You are the right candidate to fix the problems this great country is facing. I hope you would chose Obama as your running mate when you get the nomination.