People, Let's Be Clear: THIS RACE IS STILL WIDE OPEN

[Beetwasher]

And I say that as someone w/ no horse in the race. I have not even decided on a candidate and I like them all and think we'd be lucky w/ any of them.

This scenario, 1. Obama 2. Edwards 3. Clinton, (which is looking like the likely outcome) means it is WIDE OPEN. It is the most unpredictable of any of the scenarios (and the most exciting!). Any one of the candidates can still take it.

[ccpup]

1. even a 7 point margin

separating Obama from Edwards and Clinton may not give him as much of a bounce as a larger margin would have. I've always said January will be good for Obama and Edwards and February will be good for Clinton.

Now the REAL race begins!

[Beetwasher]

3. This Is A VERY Exciting Outcome

I'm proud of our party backing a black candidate like this for the first time ever! We should ALL be proud of what's been accomplished. We are lucky that one of these three will be the next President!

[ccpup]

6. it is historic

but it is one caucus on one night with a long road ahead. As I just wrote in another thread, Obama and those speaking for him and around him are all going to have to bring their A Game every single day until they get the necessary number of delegates locked for the nomination.

This is where National Political Experience and dealing with a National Press comes in handy. :-)

[Beetwasher]

10. Of Course!

Thus the point of my post!

[AZ Criminal JD]

48. First time ever???

In 1988 Jesse Jackson won 13 primaries and caucuses!. He took 7 million votes and got over 1200 delegates. What is this first time ever???

[Occam Bandage]

2. "Wide" meaning "Clinton or Obama."

[Beetwasher]

4. No, "Wide" Meaning Any One Of The Three Front Runners

I have no idea what would give you any other interpretation.

[skipos]

5. Edwards (who I like) polls in the teens in NH and SC

Do you think that will change now? I don't.

[ccpup]

7. maybe not

it may get tighter between Clinton and Obama with Clinton either winning NH or placing a very close second, which could then put the Press into Comeback Kid mode for her.

The Race has just begun.

[ChiciB1]

8. I Do! This Is Now... Time To Re-Group... n/t

[Beetwasher]

9. Heh?

Yes, it most certainly can and probably will.

[Occam Bandage]

14. Extraordinarily unlikely. He has nothing elsewhere.

The only reason he did as well as he did in Iowa was that he spent every day there for years. Now it's about money, momentum, and infrastructure. Edwards is 0/3 there.

[Occam Bandage]

11. The fact that Edwards has little organization elsewhere and no money to spend.

He needed Iowa. He's done.

[Beetwasher]

15. Uhh, No

You have very little understanding of the situation if you think that's the case. Not true at all.

[Occam Bandage]

18. Which do you doubt?

He's strapped for cash, and can't raise any more, because he was an idiot and took matching funds (the reason I dropped my support of him). He has the lightest infrastructure of the top three in Super Tuesday states. He's polling in the teens in SC and NH, and his recognition is high. He has nowhere to go.

[Beetwasher]

20. LOL!

Damn, you sure got the hate on. What gives?

"(the reason I dropped my support of him)."

Why do I find that hard to believe?

"..because he was an idiot and took matching funds"

Oh, that's why. :eyes:

You're useless opinion is noted and dismissed. W/ prejudice. Wow, you got teh serious hate hard-on for Edwards, huh?

[Occam Bandage]

22. Hate? I don't hate him. I can see he won't win. There's a difference.

I don't think I've said anything unfair about him. He has the weakest infrastructure. He's low on cash, and he can't raise money. The instant he took matching funds, he rendered himself unable to compete past Iowa, and I moved over to Biden.

Edwards is done. Don't shoot the messenger.

[Beetwasher]

24. You Overestimate The Value Of Iowa

And underestimate his second place showing. You've got a hard on to show that "Edwards is done". That statement is simply not supported by the results tonight. Not even close. I don't know why it's so important to you to be convinced that he's done, but if it floats your boat... If you don't recognize your bias, it's your shortcoming.

[Occam Bandage]

26. Iowa isn't that important. However, it was the only state Edwards has been remotely competitive in.

His 2nd-place showing is one lower than he needed. After Iowa, movement in the primaries is driven by money, infrastructure, and momentum. He doesn't have #1. He doesn't have #2. And now, he lost the opportunity to get #3. He needed to be the Big Winner tonight. Obama was instead. He's done.

(What is with your constant penis references?)

[Beetwasher]

29. "(What is with your constant penis references?)"

It's your Edwards hard on, not mine. You are apparently on a mission. It's your obsession. Whatever.

Edward's made a fine showing, as did all the front runners. Obama's the clear winner and front runner now, but not one of them is done.

"He needed to be the Big Winner tonight."

According to you, because obviously you've got a thing for Edwards. That's for you to work out.

[Occam Bandage]

31. It can be hard to cope when your candidate loses.

You'll get over it.

[Beetwasher]

34. LOL! You Sure Are On A Mission

:rofl:

Holy cow are you clueless. Man, what is it about Edwards that gets you all wet?

[Occam Bandage]

35. When you can't argue the facts, argue the motive.

And dude, you need to get laid big-time.

[Beetwasher]

38. LOL! Argue Motive? You Mean Like: "It can be hard to cope when your candidate loses."

:rofl:

"and dude, you need to get laid big-time."

Oh, yeah, Cupcake. Come on over and give ol' Beet a smooch! :rofl:

[Occam Bandage]

41. You haven't given any counterarguments, other than invoking the state of my penis.

[Beetwasher]

42. Counterarguments To What?

Nanny nanny boo boo? :shrug:

[Occam Bandage]

44. Let's try again. Here are the arguments you have ignored in favor of my penis:

0. Edwards is polling badly in New Hampshire and South Carolina, down by double digits.

1. Edwards has by far worst cashflow of the top three. He took matching funds, and thus is barred from raising or spending much of anything until summer. He cannot purchase support.

2. Edwards has the weakest infrastructure of the top three. He had a huge Iowa machine, but barely anything at all in New Hampshire or South Carolina, to say nothing of Super Tuesday. He hasn't campaigned anywhere but Iowa. He cannot build support.

3. Movement in primaries comes from infrastructure, money, and momentum. Therefore, he required momentum to capture the nomination. Obama has captured the momentum with his 38-30 win in Iowa.

4. Therefore, Edwards is extraordinarily unlikely to compete from this point onwards.

[Beetwasher]

45. I Guess History Means Nothing To You

Other candidates with less than what Edward's has have won after losing Iowa. Including Bill Clinton. It is only extraordinarily unlikely in YOUR fevered imagination.

The race has only NOW begun. Polls before now are essentially meaningless. If you knew anything about HISTORY you would know that. All you know is your mission. Carry on!

[Occam Bandage]

49. Bill Clinton's campaign was remarkable indeed, and first

one ought recognize that a historic comeback is not a statement of likelihood. People have drawn royal flushes in poker, but a royal flush is still extraordinarily unlikely, and if you need to draw a royal flush to avoid losing a big hand...well, I'm going to say that it's extraordinarily unlikely that you're going to keep your shirt.

Now, the differences from then and now:

There was a far more open field. Harkin won Iowa and did nothing else, since he had no support elsewhere (and nobody else even bothered campaigning there). Clinton built huge support, but fell apart after some sex scandals, then rebuilt. Tsongas found he didn't have the funding to keep up, and flamed out after winning New Hampshire. There were no powerful challengers to Clinton; it was a weak field of entirely 2nd-tier nobodies, since most of the heavy hitters assumed that Bush would handily win re-election.

[Beetwasher]

50. Yes, Yes, Carry On, I See It's Important For You To Convince Yourself Edward's Is Done

Never mind history. :eyes:

Carry on, Cupcake! Lovely crystal ball you have there,who's going to win the Superbowl? :eyes:

[Occam Bandage]

51. You invoke history, I point out how the situation is different, you go back to the pillow talk.

[Beetwasher]

53. Well, I Do Need To Get Laid

Every situation is different, and this one is still too close and too fluid to count any of the front runners out. Unless of course you're obsessed w/ doing so.

Hell, for all I or anyone knows this COULD be the nail in Edward's campaign, but we will only know in hindsight. If you're certain it's only because you want to be.

[Beetwasher]

46. Delete

[regnaD kciN]

16. I don't think Edwards is done until the S.C. primary...

If he fails to win that, I'd guess he pulls out. The question would be, to whom does he throw his support? If the race between Clinton and Obama is tight at that point, Edwards's endorsement might determine the nominee.

[Occam Bandage]

19. He'll stay in through SC, but his shot at the nomination is over.

[creeksneakers2]

23. I think Edwards will stay in until he's mathematically eliminated

Didn't he hang around as long as he could in 2004?

[K Gardner]

30. You're becoming redundant. Got a problem with letting ALL the people vote or something?

[Occam Bandage]

They certainly can vote.

I'm not saying they can't. I'm saying that in all likelihood, they will be voting for Clinton or Obama.

[Beetwasher]

32. Apparently Iowa Decides The Race

:shrug:

The poster is obviously on a mission.

[Occam Bandage]

33. On a mission? I made one post, and replied to those who replied to me.

Iowa doesn't decide who will win, but it can decide who won't win. Edwards gambled everything on IA, and lost. It's no skin off my back either way.

[Beetwasher]

36. Mission Is As Mission Does. "but it can decide who won't win."

Not with these numbers. If Edwards had lost big, maybe, but he didn't.

What is it about Edward's that gets you all wet and bothered?

[Occam Bandage]

39. Edwards is badly behind in every other state. He needed something to give him a lift.

He didn't get it.

You're bordering on the obscene. I'd appreciate it if you'd type with both hands.

[Beetwasher]

43. "You're bordering on the obscene."

"And dude, you need to get laid big-time."

Come and get it, Cupcake. :rofl:

[K Gardner]

52. Every other state has not even WEIGHED IN yet.. what don't you

understand that THIS, tonight.. is the first MOST of the country has seen of this race. And what they will see in the papers tomorrow is this: OBAMA WINS... Edwards 2nd... Hillary Lost. What you see is that 70% of people voting voted AGAINST Hillary. Edwards got 2nd and he was outspent 6 to 1. Fucking Huckabee won with no $$. Edwards and Obama have support outside Iowa. Stop the nationwide b/s. Wait until the week prior to Super Tuesday and THEN look at a poll... please !!

[Occam Bandage]

54. Ignore the data if it makes you feel better.

Obama has strong nationwide support. So does Hillary, though the momentum is now Obama's. Edwards has some, but not nearly enough to compete. He'll still stay in it, though, since he's winning delegates for the convention (and delegates are valuable, since they write the platform). Everyone else is completely dead.

[laureloak]

12. Absolutely. Great showing by 3 candidates!

No losers and ~~ahem~~ no winner either.

[Laurab]

25. ~~ahem~~

Senator Barack Obama : 37.55%
Senator John Edwards : 29.85%
Senator Hillary Clinton : 29.38%
Governor Bill Richardson : 2.11%
Senator Joe Biden : 0.95%
Uncommitted : 0.13%
Senator Chris Dodd : 0.02%
Precincts Reporting: 1728 of 1781

[underpants]

13. That's the way she sees it too

[Egnever]

17. Yup this thing aint close to over.

I like the way its starting though.

[2Design]

21. sheeple follow what the media want - that is the problem -

if the media keep saying certain names over and over or false things over and over - they never investigate - they just say - ok the media said this guy is electable - we should vote for him - it really has become a popularity media contest - it is sickening

[Cha]

27. You got it, 28erl!

The mediawhores will be out in full force like they were in 2000 and 2008..manipulating how they want because we've never done anything about them.

[frogmarch]

28. In '92 Bill Clinton got 6% in Iowa.

No, it's not over. Far from it.

Go Edwards!

[BenDavid]

37. back to 92....Harkin's win in Iowa was meaningless since it's

his home turf, but he and Brown took a couple of other Northern states' caucuses early on, while Tsongas won New Hampshire and came on strong in New England,(clinton declared, "comeback Kid) and Bob Kerrey even won South Dakota. However, Bill Clinton swept a series of Southern contests, starting with a key win in Georgia, and his more national campaign rapidly outdistanced all of them;

I agree this race is not over and I will support HRC till the last dog dies, and I suspect just as in 92 HRC will make a comeback in NH and then it is on to Michigan and SC. Here is a lil history

February 10: Iowa
February 18: New Hampshire
February 25: South Dakota
March 3: Colorado, Georgia, Maryland; also Minnesota, Idaho caucuses

Ben David

[Colobo]

47. This is Obama's year.

[Zorra]

40. True. President Clinton got 3% in Iowa and lost New Hampshire

in 1992.