then I'd say yes, most everyone but Edwards, Trippi and his supporters think this is a very bad idea.
snip: Based on winning the primary, this decision makes sense. But if it succeeds, we will have a handicapped nominee for a long, painful six months. The RNC, the GOP candidate, the conservative 527s (like Freedom Watch) will all be beating the shit out of our nominee, and without the ability to control message and directly fire back, we'll be at a gross disadvantage.
So what would Edwards do, depend on free media? Really? The same ones that trashed Gore and Kerry, and have already done a good number on Edwards? Rely on the good sense of the voting public? Please. If you can't talk to them, they listen to the people who can.
Money isn't everything in politics. But there's a difference being outspent $4 million (like in Montana's 2006 Senate race), or $9 million (like in Virginia's 2006 Senate race), and being outspent by $125 million. Kerry spent $175 million through the summer in 2004. Political inflation will likely make that number even bigger this time around.
For the Edwards plan to work and not hurt us, we would need:
* A ridiculously frugal Edwards effort, with nary a wasted dollar spent to win the nomination,
* Fundraising troubles for the RNC, the GOP nominee, and the conservative 527s,
* Gangbuster fundraising for the DNC and progressive 527s,
* A media willing to treat Edwards with respect and fairness,
* A public unusually resistant to typical GOP bullshit and scare tactics.
http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/10/2/125557/813