So explain to me why the 2004 primary analogy won't hold

[StrongBad]

The analogy of which I speak of course refers to how Dean was the solid frontrunner (even in national polls I believe) before the caucus and then imploded immediately after a 2nd place finish. He never recovered and lost the subsequent states and national numbers in polls.

Was it simply the scream that did this or does the mass media hype generated by Iowa just reverberate more soundly in this age than in the past?

What is to say that Obama won't sweep up now after a solid surprise win tonight?

[Warren Stupidity]

1. The BMS assassination did him in.

They played that fucked up tape loop 24/7 on every outlet. It crushed his support. Let's see what shit they pull tomorrow.


*BMS= bullshit media system.

[StrongBad]

3. Yeah that was my initial thought

I didn't see anything that happened tonight which could be distorted against a candidate though. We'll see...

[LiberalFighter]

2. Exactly... which is why it is important for the candidates to keep their eye on the prize

There are 4,051 delegates and Iowa only has 57 of those.

[AdHocSolver]

4. Dean was opposed by the Democratic party hacks who sabotaged his campaign starting with Iowa.

The party insiders manipulate the selection process behind the scenes to a great degree. They were pretty much united behind Kerry in 2004 and "anointed" him the nominee. In 2008, the party INSIDERS are pretty much divided between Clinton and Obama.

So, don't count Clinton out. Not that I want her to become our candidate. She would bring out a gaggle of right-wing nut cases that could not only lose us the election, but could lose us Congressional seats as well.

I would not want to see Obama anointed either, for the same reason that I was appalled at Kerry's being anointed by the party. They killed the primary contest which ended the mystery and excitement of the campaign. This lost the Democrats tons of free publicity and lost many opportunities to get our platform out to the public. The 2004 election was so close, that the Republicans were able to steal it.

Considering that the Republicans have a big dog race going on their side, it makes it even more imperative that the Democratic race keep going. Otherwise, they will get a lot of free publicity and attention while our campaigns shut down.

Although I give Obama credit for a well-earned win in Iowa, the general election will NOT be decided by a bunch of enthusiastic, die-hard Democrats. It will require the Democratic candidate picking up independent and moderate Republican votes as well.

The Republicans were able to steal 2000 and 2004 because the vote counts were very close. Our candidate will need a decisive excess of vote totals over whomever the Republicans run to prevent another election theft.

My opinion is that Edwards would do better than Obama in a general election. I also believe that Edwards is better equipped to dealing with the corporations, which have gotten us in the mess we are in now. Edwards has done battle with the corporations and beaten them during his successful career as a litigation attorney. Edwards' comments tell me that he has seen and understands the dark side of the corporate world, and Obama's statements tell me he doesn't realize what he would be up against.