It's probably a little from column A and a little from column B. It's trying to make lemons out of lemonade. He is trying to turn a weakness into a stregnth…whether it works or on is a different story, but kudos to him for thinking out of the box.

of course it's a political calculation. he knows he can't compete with the big dogs, so he's calling foul

This is a complete and utter waste of good, hard earned money from the American people. He has already lost this election. He will go no where with these public funds - he is going no where now.

Oh John, don't be disingenuous!!! If you had Hillary or Obama's war chest, would you be so willing to accept public financing??? I think not….

Strict spending limits ? Don't make me laugh ! This from someone who sees no anomaly in living in a 28,000 square foot estate and holding stock in Fortress , who is foreclosing on Katrina victims.

He's more concerned in getting $400.00 haircuts than in using his vast fortune for bettering our country.

An absolute waste of my taxes on a losing campaign. Please scrap the public financing system. We already have so much waste due to out of control spending.

I studied body language and John is a textbook example of how someone hides their true motives.

For example just before he takes the mic in the beginning, he smiles a most insincere smile that says "yes, I know I have to smile here, so I will…" he then "wipes " his face to change from who he really is, to who he wants us to see. He goes into acting mode.

On the bus, after he talks about finance, he says, "Sen Clinton can show it by doing it in the campaign," his face changes into a mocking smile. It's very quick, but shows a lot.
When he says "combat wars", he shows such a weakness that I cannot imagine him taking on Islamo-fascism and see the facial expressions of a lawyer once again trying to "win over" the jury.

Principled stand! How can Hillary say she's for public financing and getting money out of politics when she gleefully smashes through fundraising records, has $1 million bundlers who put Bush's Pioneers to shame and rejects public financing? Edwards isn't perfect but this is a big stand for getting dirty money out of politics.

I used to support unquestionably. However once he started this reversal on the Iraq war he lost my respect and support.

I would have respected him more if he simply said, based on the information I had I made the right decision.

Thus I do not believe anything he does is uncalculated.

I think it is political principle. He won't take money from lobbyists either.

And it ensures he will have enough money to compete with the candidate fuinded by the rich: Obama and Clinton.

This may bring more union support because they now see he has enough money to compete.

I think this is a principled move. Edwards is very much on track to raise his original target budget of $40 million on his own, and if he does so, he can really only expect to gain $10 million in matching funds from this, because of the spending cap. Also, it does limit his ability to spend additional money, even if he could raise it.

Edwards has believe in public campaign financing for a long time and has been talking about it since at least 2004. I do believe he decided it's time to put his money where his mouth is. This move doesn't benefit him all that much, so I don't see it as a cynical political calculation.

Maybe when it comes down to it, it is a political calculation. I am far more likely to vote for him because of going with public financing and taking this stand than I would if he had the money of Hill-Obama and spent it all to get my vote. In this respect I hope it gets him more votes than the money of Hill-Obama combined.

I think it's brilliant. Since Clinton talked in the NH debate about being for public financing, John has given her the chance to put her money where her mouth is.

Edwards is running a very thrifty campaign and has what he needs to compete. By taking this additional step, he gets a bit more assistance and once again, leads on the issues.

I commend John Edwards for taking a stand against big corporate lobbyists and big corporate donors.

It really is time to end the "pay to play game."

Hillary refuses to do so.

Thankfully, we have a Democratic candidate in John Edwards who is not afraid to turn his back on big corporate donors/big money that is corrupting our democratic process.

Everything John Edwards does is 'political calculation'. He doesn't have a bone in his body that doesn't reek 'It's all about me'. The only 'politician' that truly is about the USA, in every fiber of his body, is Mike Huckabee. Give him an objective listen sometime. You can't help but be impressed.

I think the best proof of insincerity here is to look at the contrast between Joe Trippi's 2003 declaration when Dean opted out and his statement yesterday when Edwards opted in. Quite a contrast…

What John and Elizabeth Edwards need to do is accept their defeat and pay more attention to spending the dying days of Elizabeth with her family in peace instead of raging in the greed for something she will never have or see

Well…John & Elizabeth Edwards have been through enough in their lives and I am sure they would swap all their $ for their son back and Elizabeth's health. Having said that, I believe they have reached a point where they realize they don't have the ability to continue on in this election unless they have more money to compete. Having seen Elizabeth Edwards in a new TV ad bring her battle with Cancer into the request for more funds for John, I would say they have turned a tragic, sad corner.

I wasn't going to vote for John anyway, but I feel very sorry for them and I hope they find peace in a life that is very long and doesn't include living in the White House.

This guy is a pathological liar.

Spent the early part of his career lying to juries to collect big damage awards.

Now he is lying to try and cover for his poor fundraising abilities.

Embarrassing!

Principled stand. Edwards has been considering this for some time. I understand that people tend to be skeptical of people in politics, because we have all seen so much. But everyone who has been with Edwards since the early days of the Senate race knows that this is pure Edwards. John Edwards is one politician who will stand on principle.
I am proud of him.

i object to public funding fueling individual ego and ambition on the presidential level. One who desires to serve as president obviously has the needs and wants of the public as a motivational force buried some place dark and deep within their programme. In fact the role of president for a country of this size seems absurd. Acting as an individual national representative seems more practical, while have legislation created by more localized government servants would be better for us all.

Thank God, we have someone who's willing to sacrifice and do something about presidential campaign reform; even it has an adverse effect on his fundraising. I admire him for that. Let's see how many other candidates follow.

So why did he ever raise money in the first place? Why didn't he say he would do this in the very beginning? That would be real leadership. Now it looks like, if he means it or not, that he can't compete and is putting pressure on the others that have done better. I don't like it.

Edwards has been releasing specific plans to solve our most pressing issues for some time now! Unfortunatly, he has been ignored by a media that is in love with the Hillary vs Obama angle. This is another bold stand and I only hope that people begin to notice his campaign more and take the time to research his positions along with the big two! Go Edwards!

Edwards' tapping of public funds is both principled and political calculation.

All I know, is that Hillary won't use her last name in the primary, and is attending a birthday party with millionaires in Hollywood. I think any candidate that steps aside from the money, is not only viable, but electable.

ITS ABOUT $$$$$

A politician making a "political calculation"…Wow! What a surprise…and, let's see, that hard decision about taking thousands if not millions of dollars for free from the government…Gosh, I know I'm just a hick from Arkansas but is there anyone who would say no to that?

I think Edwards is being the naive politician that thinks doing "the right thing" will win. He knows he can raise more by forgoing public financing and taking lobbyist k street money. Another jerk trying to show everyone up. I say when the teachers not looking we beat him up and take his lunch money

He is even more divisive than Hillary, if that can be believed !

Although I do agree fundamentally that there's waaay too much $ in campaigns in general, I think his only aim is to get elected and be popular, NOT carry out his life based on principle.

Why can't we get a Ronald Reagan-esque man in office ?!

I think this is mostly a principled stand. Money has taken over politics, the "Money Primary" is one of the worst phrases in politics. People should mater not money.

Of course, if he couldn't still be competitive while taking public finance, he probably wouldn't do it.

I couldn't be more proud of Senator Edwards. This is just one of the million reasons I support him because he is the ONLY candidate who will look out for America. The others? Don't make me laugh.

I also couldn't be more ashamed and disgusted by the comments some have made here. GOOD GRIEF. I realize it is America and everyone has a right to speak. Just can't help but feel that sometimes it might be better to think before you do so.

The guy is a multi Millionaire. He believes in PUBLIC money ? Is there any other kind as far as democrats are concerned.

Were we born yesterday? Nothing about this guy is principled, why should this be any different? He knows he's finished and that his best hope is for the VP slot. This will allow him to stay in the public eye until the selection is finally made by the cattle futures trading genius.

Yea so how come hillary makes the news by getting and endorsement but cnn seems to have not noticed 24000 people came out for Barack last night. You guys are doing a great job at burying his campaign.

I dare you to post this.

The guy has shown a lot of principled actions over the last few years. I think he's credible on this one.

My hope is one day laws will be passed to limit all candidates to public financing and no longer allow corporations to "donate" millions. I personally think it is sad in America that in order to be President you must be a millionaire. It is sickening how corporations and lobbyists are running our government.

This country touts herself as a capitlaist economy and the world's best democracy and people here want a multi-millionaire who made his money from ill-conceived legal suits against healthcare industries, phamaceuticals, hospitals, doctors, etc for flimsy excuses to use tax-payers money to run his campaign while keeping back his earning in life for his children. Some of you here are the most uneducated and foolish citizens of this country though i suspect most of the positive feedback here are from campaign aides who sit in their desk and write nonsense on this blog. If we want to use public fund, then we should turn to a socialist state where everybody shares in everyone success and anybody that wants to run can use the people's money (public fiancing)for his campaign. If you do not support socialism, please do not blog anything about public financing. How many presidents have ever resign because their public opinion is low? none. In UK, when the Prime Minister's level of confidence becomes low, he resigns. In such instances, may be a case could be made for public financing since the masses do not require impeachment by 2/3 majority of the congress which is almost an impossible number to attain. John Edwards should transfers his wealth to his campaign coffers and use it to run for his campaign if he believes he is the best guy to do the job. Do you not think he will make more impact putting his wealth on the line? John Kerry put his house as lien to take loan for his campaign in 2004. He believed he could win and it does not matter the outcome. Brave men, Great leaders put everything in what they believe. Mitt Romney has moved over $20M of his wealth into his campaign. He believes he can win. All the story of buying vote is lameduck excuse. Do they give any voter any money. This is the money you use to deliver your campaign in best way you deem fit. If money is the consideration to be president, why did Steve Forbes not get RNC nomination? Why did Ross Perot not win the presidential election? Why is Bill Gates still in Seattle? The reason is simple you need to get people to buy into your cause and vision and these two are far more important than money. I don't mind all the lies by politicians but i mind them taking tax payers money to run their campaign. If you can't get people to buy into your cause and vision and donate money to the common cause you all shared then you are not good enough to be the president of arguably the most important country in the world at this time in history. Please say NO to public financing of any election in this country. We have the right to vote and to vote to any candidate of our choice, so it does not matter who the corporate americans donate their money to. Each person has a single vote and nothing more. Let us quit lying to ourselves. Do not support any candidate using tax-payers money when they are worth millions. We should use that money to help the poor, children and elderly.

I'm so proud of Edwards for taking such a principled stand. If he shows that you can be elected president using public financing (and if anyone can he can), not only would we finally have a moral leader but it would pave the way for others not willing to sell their soul to run for office in the future.

And if Hillary wants to claim she supports public financing then she should do the same or concede that the only way she is going to be elected is to be in the pocket of special interests.

James - the small bus will pick you up to take you the voting station (free donuts will be provided) - oh…and to answer your question on why healthcare costs are so expensive - it has NOTHING to do with lawyers suing insurance companies for hundreds of millions (living in 35000 sq foot mansions..and getting 400 haircuts) - you my friend are exactly what the DNC loves…a true non-thinker….good for you

It is a shameless political calculation. He has always had the same position as Senator Clinton: I'm pro-public financing, but I have to be able to compete. Now having gone deep into the process and realizing he can't compete anyway, he has developed the "principle" that he is for public financing. Principles are not ideas that pop up in the middle of an extensive, life-consuming process. Tactics are.

While I was surprised at John's choice to accept public financing, I am not surprised. He has spent his entire career attempting to make principled arguments, and supporting what is right, vs. what is expedient.

I continue to believe that John is the best candidate, because he is the one with the commitment and passion to do the right thing, not just that which is expedient. This is why he has offered clear, complete explanations of his policies and beliefs. He's not constantly avoiding questions, as is Hillary.

My single biggest frustration with the campaign this year is the mainstream media's attempt to hold a coronation of Hillary a year ahead of the election. Even worse, when Bush starts talking about Hillary, you know it's to make sure they have the WEAKEST democrat on the ticket!

All I can say is I hope we see a repeat of '04, when the media darling in September '03, Howard Dean, had his comeuppance in Iowa.

Ok - why hasn't CNN picked up on the "young black men will all be dead or in prison if I'm not elected" story? It you can report about Rush Limbaugh's remarks - someone who isn't even RUNNING for the office - you should absolutely report on these idiotic Edwards remarks.

This is his admission of defeat in not able to raise enough personal funds for his election campaign, as Hillary & Obama are able to do.

This public funding will put a spending limit on his campaign thus restricting his messages to get across.

He is only dreaming that Hillary and Obama should also get public funding and restrict their campaign spending and, if he gets nominated, he would ask the republican nominee to agree to public funding to level the playing field. He is just naive.

So far I am really impressed with Edwards. Why did we stop talking about reform? Here he goes using it eh. I cant believe reading what idiot america says here. Especially the long paragraphs. Just look at the issues and then look at how the candidate's stand on them and you will narrow it down to Edwards being the most sane!

Laura Tulsa, I felt exactly same way with you, but I didn't know how to explain Edwards facial expression. Thank you. His facial expression has no confidence and his speech is not to be trusted. He is fine as lawyer but natually not for the President