The sudden decision by former Sen. John Edwards (D-N.C.) to halt his White House bid after vowing to last until the Democratic convention came as a surprise to advisers and supporters and left political strategists uncertain about the impact on the race.

Members of his inner political circle said that the decision to suspend the campaign was “very personal” and made between Edwards and his wife Elizabeth within the past 48 hours. It appeared to come as a surprise to senior campaign officials who made a forceful argument for Edwards’s political viability on Super Tuesday, Feb. 5, when 22 states cast votes for the Democratic nominee, and beyond.

In a sign of the suddenness of the decision, Edwards was scheduled to deliver a major address on poverty in New Orleans Wednesday afternoon. Hours before the speech, his political aides informed the media that it would be a farewell speech instead.

John Moylan, a campaign adviser and one of Edwards’s closest friends, said in an interview Wednesday that Edwards decided to leave the race now because he believed it would allow him to retain the greatest influence as an advocate for members of the working class and Americans living in poverty.

Moylan dismissed speculation that Elizabeth Edwards had suffered a downturn in health, a rumor floated in recent weeks in light of her absence from the campaign trail and public spotlight.

Senior Edwards adviser Dave “Mudcat” Saunders also said that her health has not changed since the last prognosis and subsequent press conference. But Saunders, who said Wednesday’s news caught him “off guard,” noted that Elizabeth Edwards has been “going through a lot.”

In his talk with The Hill Wednesday, Moylan said he thought John Edwards “could have continued and that was a real consideration.”

Moylan added: “The bottom line is what he’s said repeatedly: The race is not about him or the other candidates, it’s about the issues. He felt it was the right time and right place to step aside and that he could more effectively give [his priority issues] a voice by getting out of the race.”

Edwards sought to do just that during his speech in New Orleans.

“This work goes on,” said Edwards. “There are homes to build here, and in neighborhoods all along the Gulf. The work goes on for the students in crumbling schools just yearning for a chance to get ahead. It goes on for daycare workers, for steel workers risking their lives in cities all across this country. And the work goes on for 200,000 men and women who wore the uniform of the United States of America, proud veterans, who go to sleep every night under bridges, or in shelters.”

“Do not walk away from what’s possible, because it’s time for all of us, all of us together, to make the two Americas one,” he said.

Before finalizing his decision, Edwards said he contacted Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) and Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.) to extract promises from them to carry forward his campaign themes.

“They have both pledged to me and more importantly through me to America, that they will make ending poverty central to their campaign for the presidency,” he said.

Ed Turlington, a friend of 20 years and adviser, said Edwards will leave a clear imprint on the eventual Democratic nominee.

Turlington noted that Edwards was the first major candidate to unveil a universal healthcare plan and put “economics and working-class issues on the agenda.”

He also said that Edwards was the first candidate to talk about “changing the culture of money and lobbying in Washington.”

Mike Feldman, Vice President Al Gore’s traveling chief of staff in 2000, said that Edwards’s political standing and ability to advocate for his pet causes may have been damaged had he stayed in the race.  

Feldman said that Edwards could have continued to battle for more delegates, but “the risk is that his influence might have been somewhat deteriorated.”

By dropping out before Super Tuesday and primaries beyond that date in Virginia, Maryland, Wisconsin and Texas — all states where Edwards had expected to do well — he can dangle the possibility of praise or even an endorsement over Obama and Clinton.

“Both campaigns are going to be very solicitous of him and very attentive to how they treat his departure in the race,” Feldman said. “That’s a smart thing for Edwards to harness all that [attention] now in a hard fought contest.”

Clinton campaign officials said they would attempt to recruit Edwards’s supporters to their campaign, but they declined to say whether the former first lady had already sought a formal endorsement.

Turlington predicted that for the rest of this election year Edwards would continue to work to give high profile to his priority issues and unify the Democratic Party now that the contest between Obama and Clinton has become increasingly vitriolic.

Obama launched a volley of criticisms at Clinton during a speech Wednesday in Denver. At a conference call with reporters later in the day, senior Clinton campaign officials accused Obama of negative campaigning.

Endorsing either Obama or Clinton could undermine Edwards’s aspiration to serve as party unifier and advocate for the working-class and may give him reason to hold off until Democrats settle on a nominee.

Tad Devine, a senior campaign adviser to Gore in 2000, said it was difficult to predict whether most of Edwards’s supporters would migrate to Obama or Clinton.

He predicted that Obama would attract the bulk of voters who liked Edwards’s message of bringing change to Washington, while Clinton would likely be more popular among members of the working class. He said that polling from previous primaries has shown Clinton outperforming Obama among blue-collar voters.

“The message metric favors Obama, and demographic metric favors Clinton,” said Devine.

Devine said that Edwards’s departure will change the dynamics of the race dramatically by making it a two-person contest. As a result, he said, it will be easier for Obama or Clinton to emerge as a clear winner from one of the upcoming debates.

“If one candidate is dominating the other, it’s much easier for voters to see that,” he said. “It’s now a lot more tempting for both candidates to seek that control” in a debate.