Democratic candidate John Edwards publicly announced his decision to quit the presidential race on a visit to New Orleans yesterday.

Having recently lost Iowa’s caucus, the New Hampshire first-in-the-nation primary and in South Carolina, Edwards ended his campaign with the words, “it’s time for me to step aside so that history can blaze its path.”

The two forerunners, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama, are now head to head in the Democratic race.

Although his withdrawal from the race came as a shock to many, especially after his public announcement last week that he would stay in the race until “Super Tuesday,” students at the University of Massachusetts were not very surprised by his decision.

Postgraduate student Michael Bell and organizer of the UMass for John Edwards 2008 campus group expressed his disappointment in the decision.

“Obviously, I am upset,” said Bell. “I think that Edwards was the most electable candidate amongst the Democratic Party. He had middle class values, and supported middle class America. But, part of me was half expecting it. He did not win Iowa, and wasn’t considered amongst the top two [Democratic candidates] right away.”

Freshman student Alexander Lombardi, an advocate for Obama, agreed with Bell’s assessment.

“Although Edwards aroused a decent response from the Democratic community, most of his efforts were dwarfed by the success of both Clinton and Obama in the primary,” Lombardi said. “Edwards is a candidate that we have seen before. The grand theme in this election seems to be change, the notion of doing something different. Edwards certainly has the ability to create change. But, on a visual level, both Clinton and Obama represent figures that we have not seen before. People can see this difference.”

Freshman Patrick Sammon, a Republican, held a similar opinion.

“I figured Edwards would eventually drop out. Though I am doubtful over whether a Republican will win this election, I definitely don’t think that Edwards would have won.”

“I didn’t think that he would drop out, but I didn’t think he had a chance at being president,” said Republican freshman student Kira MacLean. “Though it is understandable, considering that his wife has breast cancer. It must be a difficult time for the both of them.”

Diagnosed with breast cancer after the 2004 election, Elizabeth Edwards announced that her cancer had returned and was incurable in 2006.

According to Bell, Edwards’ lack of appeal to the wealthy and powerful backers contributed to his downfall.

“One of the reasons he was not considered amongst the top two right away, aside from the 2004 election, was his approach. He appealed to the working class, not the rich and powerful,” Bell said. “If he wanted to win candidacy, he would have to change his approach. He always talked to people as though he was their equal. But, to make himself more marketable, he would have to look and act in a more presidential manner.”

According to Lombardi, “Edwards had a lot of great policies, particularly his stance on poverty.”

“What attracted me to Edwards initially was his long term plan to eliminate poverty in the US. The fact that he wanted to do it, and had a plan, really drew me into him,” Bell said.

Prior to declaring his decision, Edwards spoke with both Obama and Clinton to ensure that his poverty concerns remain discussed in the campaign. As of yet, Edwards has not endorsed either candidate.

“We do not know who will take the final steps to 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue, but what we do know is that our Democratic Party will make history … and with our convictions and a little backbone we will take back the White House in November,” said Edwards.

Lisa DeBenedicts can be reached at [email protected]

Shruti Sehegal can be reached at [email protected]