"Former senator John Edwards (N.C.) ended his bid for the presidency today in New Orleans, bringing to a close a five-year quest for the nation's highest office.

Former Sen. John Edwards is ending is campaign for the White House. (AP)Edwards was joined by his wife, Elizabeth, as well as his three children on stage. He took part in a Habitat for Humanity event following the announcement.

Edwards did not endorse either Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (N.Y.) or Barack Obama (Ill.) today and has no plans to weigh in for either candidate in the immediate future, according to aides.

"It's time for me to step aside so that history can blaze its path," Edwards said to a small crowd of supporters and reporters.

Edwards spoke in person to both Obama and Clinton yesterday and informed both candidates he was considering leaving the race. Sources familiar with those conversations insist Edwards did not asked for any sort of quid pro quo in exchange for an endorsement but rather asked Clinton and Obama to promise him to keep the focus on the issue of poverty as the campaign moved forward.

Today Edwards said that the two remaining frontrunners "both pledged to me and through me to America that they will make ending poverty central to their campaign for the presidency."

In a statement released this morning, Obama praised Edwards for shining a light on the issue of poverty and serving as a voice for the middle class in the campaign.

"While his campaign may end today, the cause of their lives endures for all of us who still believe that we can achieve that dream of one America," Obama said of Edwards and his wife, Elizabeth.

Clinton echoed those sentiments: "John Edwards ended his campaign today in the same way he started it -- by standing with the people who are too often left behind and nearly always left out of our national debate."

For Edwards, the decision to leave the race marks a significant reversal. Despite poorer-than-expected performances in Nevada's caucuses and South Carolina's primary, Edwards had pledged to remain in the race through the convention. His senior campaign strategists believed that if the former North Carolina Senator continued to accrue delegates through Super Tuesday and beyond, he would be in a position to directly influence the identity of the nominee.

Edwards struggled from the start to disrupt the dynamic of a two person race between Clinton and Obama. A win in Iowa's caucuses might have done the trick but Edwards came in second -- well behind Obama and slightly ahead of Clinton. In New Hampshire, Edwards attacked Clinton as a defender of the status quo and tried to cast the race as a choice between two change candidates: himself and Obama. But, New Hampshire voters disagreed, handing Clinton a stunning win and relegating Edwards to third place. The die was cast. Edwards received a dismal four percent in Nevada and, in his home state of South Carolina, ran a distant third last weekend.

Less than 48 hours ago, his campaign announced a new advertising effort in 10 states set to vote on Feb. 5 and reiterated their insistence that he was in the race to stay.

"This thing is going for a long time," deputy campaign manager Jonathan Prince predicted at the time.

In the end, it was not so. The campaign was loath to discuss the reasoning behind Edwards' decision before he formally made it, but the long odds of actually winning the nomination must have played a significant role in making up Edwards' mind. Edwards has also been at this game since at least 2003 -- ending up as the vice presidential nominee after a stronger than expected showing in the 2004 primary process and announcing his second run for the presidency in late 2006 from the same place he will end his race today: New Orleans.

With Edwards out of the race, the Democratic fight becomes a true two-person affair with Obama and Clinton battling one another for delegates on Super Tuesday and, in all likelihood, beyond. As we wrote earlier this week, Edwards' Super Tuesday strategy of focusing on states in the South and with significant rural populations seemed to make Obama's path rather than Clinton's more difficult over the coming weeks.

Edwards' departure also throws open the debate over whether his supporters will flock to Obama or Clinton.

Opinions differed in the moments after the decision became public.

Charlie Cook, a political analyst and publisher of the Cook Political Report, said that the racial divisions apparent in early votes could impact where Edwards' supporters ultimately wind up.

"While one can plausibly argue that Edwards withdrawal may unite the anti-Clinton vote, one can also argue that Edwards overwhelmingly white block of supporters come loose and might behave much as other white Democrats have done in the contests after Iowa, not vote for Obama," Cook said. "I don't know which of those arguments will prevail."

Carter Eskew, a senior Democratic strategist unaffiliated in this contest, offered a contrary opinion. He argued that "on balance" Edwards' departure will help Obama more than Clinton. "The Edwards voter profile is closer to her voters, but if they weren't for her before, not sure they will switch now," he said.

Exit polling conducted yesterday in Florida suggests that Edwards supporters are equally inclined to back Obama and Clinton. Forty seven percent of Edwards backers in Florida said they would be "satisfied" with Clinton as the nominee with 13 percent saying they would be "very satisfied". A similar 47 percent said they would be "satisfied" with Obama as the party's standard bearer with 19 percent saying they would be "very satisfied". Those trends were affirmed by exit poll data from South Carolina's primary on Jan. 26 as more than six in 10 Edwards supporters said they would be satisfied with either Clinton or Obama as the nominee." (Chris Cilizza, The Washington Post, January 30, 2008)