Edwards' strategy: 1) Win Iowa, 2) Win/place 2nd in Nevada 2) place in top 3 in NH, 3) win SC?

[Ninja Jordan]

then propel forward. The 'sandwich strategy,' as I call it, involves keeping the momentum he has in Iowa with a win, then using that momentum to propel him to a win or 2nd place finish in NV 3 days later, then (ideally) a second place finish in NH (though this looks like an unachievable goal if both Obama and Hillary are in the race; they will place in the top two no matter what IMO). With an Iowa victory, and two good placements in NV and NH, his prospects of wining his home state of SC become realistic. Obama will be hard to beat in SC (not to mention the popularity of the Clinton name in the area), but Edwards has roots in the region; if he wins SC, then he'll take the nomination at that point I'd think.

[SharonRB]

1. I think he'll have trouble winning Iowa with Vilsack in the race

[Ninja Jordan]

2. Vilsack seems weak, i.e., this isn't the same as '92 w/Harkin.

[Pirate Smile]

3. No. Vilsack won't win Iowa. He couldn't even get his candidate

to win the Dem primary for Governor, nor could he get his "guy" in as Head of the State Democrats.

[Inspired]

36. Correct...

Culver winning the primary was a slap in Vilsack's face. Vilsack will not win Iowa.

[Catchawave]

4. Hi Sharon!

I remember the day that picture was taken! I was a tad to the left of the picture taker. Great day in NYC :hi:

Back to Iowa, I'm rooting for everyone! May the best wo/man win, and a Dem all the way :D

[SharonRB]

5. Hi, Catch!

I remember it well. What a gorgeous day that was.

If Gore doesn't run, and I'm trying to prepare myself for the letdown when we know for sure he won't, I don't know who I'm going to support in the primary. For the general, of course, it will be whoever winds up with the nomination.

I went to an "Inconvenient Truth" party last night and on the conference call with Gore, someone asked him about running. He said he's not planning to run and he loves what he's doing now. I know that's his standard line, but I just hope all of the support he has can ultimately convince him to run. I'm just afraid we're all deluding ourselves.

[Catchawave]

22. Gore and Edwards

Two great Dems with fabulous causes I can get behind and support whether or not they get the Dem nod.

Love to the KOEBies :loveya:

[mikelgb]

26. Kucinich

[JABBS]

23. one recent poll had edwards first and vilsack near the bottom

[pstans]

32. Vilsack can be beat

and Edwards is one that can do that.

[zulchzulu]

6. Remind me. What is Edwards running on again?

Senate record? Poor boy turns into multimillionaire lawyer? Good looks? His wife?

Spill the beans, please.

[Ninja Jordan]

10. The same thing Obama's running on.

My post wasn't an endorsement of Edwards, but an analysis of his strategy.

[laureloak]

12. You can check his website if you really want to know.

[1932]

13. Two Americas. Class. Polarization of wealth and power. Helping people who

work for a living.

He actually has a clearer argument than just about anybody else I can think of.

[Trajan]

21. Edwards is a bread and butter New Deal populist ....

He runs on solid Dmeocratic policies of stable Social Security, decent wages and pensions for working americans, strong public education for ALL americans; especially the poor ....

YOU didnt know this ? ... why not ? ....

I would assume such an intelligent person like you would have already familiarized yourself with a known candidate's political worldview .....

[Clark2008]

27. I didn't know it even though people keep trying to tell me that.

:eyes:

[Trajan]

31. Funny things is : I like Clark for the same reasons ....

You seem to know that, eh ?

I will not participate in the circular firing squad ... I respect ALL of our Democratic Party hopefuls ....

I wish you and the others would do the same ...

[Infinite Hope]

7. Vilsack isn't even on the radar and is more likely to take from Hillary. Further, the caucus...

...system requires that Vilsack take over 15% which will be extremely difficult for him to do in most precincts. Those supporters in those precincts must pick someone else, their second choice. Vilsack won't be a probably for anyone in general, but especially not progressives.

[AllyCat]

8. Can someone help me understand why we are 2 years out and

already aligning ourselves behind candidates? Why are they announcing so early? It sounds like a perfect strategy to peak too soon and then have nothing left.

[1932]

14. Because ever since JFK announced he was running for president on Jan 1, 1959,

the tradition is that Democrats trying to capture that JFK feeling announce their candidacies on Jan 1st, 22 months before the election.

[kevsand]

9. He could win all four states and still lose the nomination.

There aren't very many delegates awarded in those four early contests. Edwards would have tremendous momentum, but the other contenders this time around will have much greater name recognition and resources than the "also rans" did last time. Both Clinton and Obama will be more than able to wait it out past Edwards' early storm, and still be able to deliver body blows in the major, more important contests that follow.

Once everyone realizes that the big dogs are staying in, second tier candidates will also be less likely to drop out. I don't see Edwards locking it up early like other recent nominees, even if he wins all four of the first races. This year is going to be more like the traditional marathons leading up to the convention than the early TKOs of recent history.

[Imagevision]

11. Edwards looks better this time around, especially calling his own shots, he's

supposed to announce his candidacy in new Orleans, that's a clever splash, Kick around Bus/Fema accomplishments - non-accomplishments. Elizabeth darlin, you look well and splendid! wish you both the best!!

[BluegrassDem]

15. Edwards can't win S.C. with Obama in the race

Obama would get nearly all the black vote, which is the bulk of the Democratic base in that state. No way Edwards beats out Obama there. If Obama weren't in the race, it'd be different though.

[Ninja Jordan]

16. I agree.

[benny05]

17. I'm not so certain about that either

I don't think Obama has gone to help campaign for folks in SC this past election cycle. And remember, Edwards didn't give anyone any money, but he did give them to ability to raise funds for themselves and charged the time and energy to his own PAC, which gave the pols a break.

Two, it is Edwards' backyard and he is still popular there.

Three, Obama couldn't help Harold Ford in TN. Yes, the AA is not as prevalent, but Ford should have had that race well in hand, and even Obama's rising star couldn't help Ford close the deal.

I'm not saying Obama isn't a viable candidate in general if he wishes to be tested, but there is a lot of assumptions he would win SC. You gotta have the ground boots organization, which I don't think Obama has. Not to say he can't or won't, but if there is something Edwards learned from running before, you have to have the ground boots ready.

I don't think Edwards would be announcing to run otherwise.

In terms of the delegates vote, Iowa has a surprising amount of delegates for a small state. They don't have as many electoral votes in the general election.

Even if Edwards wins Iowa, NV, and SC (which I think he will), I agree with my fellow blogger from Illinois that those 4 races may not sow up the nomination for a super Tuesday, unlike last time. This may be one of the longer primary seasons in decades.

[BluegrassDem]

24. Obama is the first serious black candidate in history

You're crazy if you think Edwards will win the black vote in South Carolina over him. Obama will easily win that primary.

[benny05]

25. Just skeptical

as anyone should be. You can make those assumptions all you want, but it doesn't make it so.

Last time numbers for SC Primary: I got these from Wikipedia...
Edwards 45%
Kerry 30%
Sharpton -10%

Sharpton was still in the race, I believe, at that time.

[kevsand]

35. Wow. Sharpton got negative 10%?

Just kidding. (That would be a new definition for sucking, though, wouldn't it?)

[benny05]

37. Thanks for the syntax lesson

And you are a good Illini person..sorry for the small, but not insignificant syntax error

[Ninja Jordan]

38. lol

[Imagevision]

34. OBAMA COULD BE PINK AND IT WOULDN'T MATTER! - NEW GAME, NEW GENERATION!!

[Eurobabe]

18. Did he lob off that mole yet?

He can't win any state until that thing goes.

[benny05]

19. Good morning, 48percenter

That mole was removed nearly 2 years ago, but he did it because he was told it could be cancerous.

[Eurobabe]

20. It's good evening where I am....

I saw JE in New Hampshire, he's a good speaker, has charisma, etc., but he wouldn't be my first choice. He should have been at the top of the '04 ticket, NOT Kerry, JMHO.

I'm not sure I am firmly behind anybody at this juncture. Stay tuned, it's too early to expend the energy getting wigged out over candidates.

[ieoeja]

29. Cause "it could be cancerous".

Yeah, sure. That's what I got the doc to tell the HMO when I had a growth removed from my nose even though the doc told me otherwise.

Ironicaly, the doc was wrong, and it *was* cancerous. So much for my one attempt at an insurance scam. Fortunately, it was the cancer all the other cancers used to beat up in cancer school and take its lunch money. Or as the cancer specialist said, "it might have killed you in another four or five decades left untreated," and I was already 40!

[benny05]

30. So are you saying you believe Edwards' reason or not?

Why would he dishonest about it at the time he had it removed, especially considering his wife had life-threatening breast cancer, and he went with her to every chemo treatment?

Just because you were dishonest shouldn't imply that he was.

You have to remember he took on dishonesty by insurance companies, doctors, and corporates who hid the truth when he recognized the same problems for people resurfaced more than once.

Jeepers...

[Eurobabe]

42. Yeah arguing over someone's motives for removing a MOLE

is about as dumb as critiquing someone's argyle sweaters during a primary run. JMHO.

[fuzzyball]

28. Obama is a stalking horse for Hillary!!!

I heard Dick toesucking Morris opine that Obama has
been pushed into the news front & center to suck the
oxygen out for other contenders such as Edwards, Kerry,
possibly Gore, et all. Morris contends that Obama will
suck out the newsmedia attention away from the real
Hillary contenders, and in the end it will be easier for
Hillary to beatout the only other front runner, Obama.

[Imagevision]

33. Bill reminds me of Kerry, they both had their moments, Obama, new blood, new talent!!

Bill Clinton supported Joe Lieberman and we know what happened to Joe, he lost and Bill split!!

[Clarkie1]

39. Edwards will do well. No doubt about it.

He has an inspiring and moral message, and kudos to him for that.

My problem with Edwards as President is that I think that what is really most needed at this time in a Commander in Chief is a strong command of foreign affairs, and experience in real-world international relations. Someone who does not need on the job training for that kind of role. I want someone with administrative experience in crises management with a liberal outlook on the world. The ultimate anti-neocon, if you will.

That said, I think Edwards is doing a service for all America by his message, and I hope all Americans take his message to heart whether or not they support him in his quest for the Presidency at this time in our history.

[SmellsLikeDeanSpirit]

40. I think Edwards will win the whole thing. I just have a gut feeling.

Especially, if Gore doesn't get in.

[mrgorth]

41. You said

"then (ideally) a second place finish in NH (though this looks like an unachievable goal if both Obama and Hillary are in the race"

Hillary will not do well in NH.