Not that I want him to, but I think Edwards will win in Iowa if the other two continue duking it out

[mtnsnake]

Sequence of events the way I see it:

1) A few weeks ago, Edwards is the first one to go on the attack against Hillary. He does pretty well for it, although some people start wondering if his attacks will turn Iowans off.

2) The media starts telling Obama that he needs to go on the attack against Clinton, too, if he wants to move up in the polls. So the week after Edwards goes after her, Obama goes after her.

3) Edwards still attacks her, but starts backing off from the real tough stuff and starts concentrating on what he's got to offer.

4) In the meantime, Obama gets positive feedback from the press after his attacks with Hillary, so he increases his attacks upon her even more.

5) Hillary gets fed up, she evens the score with both of them as far as the attacks go, but decides to concentrate on Obama because he's Numero Uno in Iowa.

6) Obama doesn't like her going after him, so he decides to go all out against Hillary, and Hillary returns the favor.

7) As we stand now, the campaign jousting has basically boiled down to a duel between Obama and Hillary, almost as if everyone has forgotten about Edwards.

8) As Hillary and Obama continue to hammer away at each other, with each one telling Iowans how the other one sucks, Edwards gets a chance to simply promote himself while the other two go at it.

9) Ultimately, Iowans get sick of the Hillary/Obama slugfest and decide to go for Edwards because he's the one who ends up getting the opportunity to promote himself at the expense of the other two people tearing each other apart.

My point is that if it's true that Iowans don't like in-fighting among candidates, then it's only obvious that Hillary and Obama might lose support because of their dueling, and any support they lose will most likely go to Edwards. If only 2 or 3% of Hillary's and Obama's supporters get fed up with the in-fighting, it's enough to give Edwards a hand-me-down victory. JMO of course.

[harun]

1. I think Edwars will win Iowa because of the caucus system they

have in place and because the people who live there are progressives. JMO of course.

[Green Mountain Dem]

2. Unfortunately....It doesn't matter

Edwards will suffer the same fate as Howard Dean and our candidate will be whoever the DLC selects and that's the way it is!! Period.

[Cameron27]

3. How will the DLC cause Edwards to lose Iowa?

[mtnsnake]

6. Not to get the thread off topic, but you're saying the DLC is why Kerry beat Dean?

and that the same thing will happen to Edwards there?

Hey, I was just as devastated as you when Dean lost out, but I'm not sure that was the reason.

(late edit: left the word "sure" out by mistake.)

[vireo]

4. Thanks for the thoughtful analysis

I was envisioning the same scenario, but then again I'm an Edwards partisan.

[FrenchieCat]

5. You've got it exactly right.......and so, the media is helping

John Edwards by keeping him out of the Frey....and angering the grassroots by not mentioning him as much as Obama and Hillary....while always, always, however, keeping him in as a "top Tier" candidate of mention.

The media never ever mention his IWR co-sponsorship, or the implications as to what he knew while he sat on the intelligence committee and why he didn't support any of the alternative resolutions that most other progressive Dems voted for, yet supported the IWR to the infinite degree. They also didn't have any issues with the fact that his "apology" came way too late, and was part and parcel of his plans for running once again for President.

Truth be known, the media liked John Edwards in 2004 (which is why they promoted him ad-nauseum as VP on the Kerry ticket after their promotion of him after Iowa didn't pan out as well as they wanted), and it appears that they will commence to favor him more and more when it most counts; right prior to the first primary.

Edwards was liked at the Bildenberg conference that he attended not long before he was chosen VP, and it is my belief that if Edwards gets the nomination, we will then find out that this guy is just not as progressive as he has led us to believe.

NETWORKS ANOINTED KERRY, EDWARDS BEFORE IOWA DID
Study: Iowa Caucus Victors Received 98 Percent Positive Coverage
WASHINGTON, DC—Prior to their surprising Iowa caucus performances, 98 percent of the network evening news coverage of Democratic Presidential candidates John Kerry and John Edwards was positive, according to research conducted by the Center for Media and Public Affairs (CMPA). The study also found Howard Dean received more critical coverage over the same time period, at 58 percent positive.

This is CMPA’s second ElectionWatch report of Campaign 2004. ElectionWatch will provide regular updates of how the broadcast networks are covering the candidates, the issues and the campaign. This report examines the 91 stories broadcast on the ABC, CBS and NBC evening news from January 1st through January 18th, the night before the Iowa caucus.

OTHER MAJOR FINDINGS:

Golden Boys Get Midas Touch-Not one person quoted by the networks had anything critical to say about North Carolina Senator John Edwards (100 percent favorable coverage) in the two and half weeks leading up to the Iowa caucus, while 96 percent of the evaluations of Massachusetts Senator John Kerry were positive.
http://www.cmpa.com/pressReleases/NetworksAnointedKerryEdwards.htm

"AND THEN THERE WERE TWO"
http://dir.salon.com/story/news/feature/2004/02/04/primaries/index.html
February 4, 2004
Kerry breaks into the open field, with Edwards still in pursuit -- while the Dean meteor continues to burn out.

[Adelante]

7. Good analysis

Edwards is going to be reverting to Sunny Johnny any minute now and will reap the benefit, but only if those Iowa voters who are confused already by his image changes can readjust quickly enough. However, I have the sense if the frontrunners start bleeding support, Biden or Richardson could be the ones to pick it up. I don't see it going to Edwards as a sure thing, although some of it would.

[Cameron27]

9. Yep, a few weeks before the caucus

he'll be Mr. Sunshine again and the rest of the year will be forgotten. I sure hope you're right about support being picked up by Biden or Richardson though.

[Clark2008]

8. Good God NOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO!

[zulchzulu]

10. Edwards is leading in the "attack"

He'll finish second to Obama.

[Stop Cornyn]

11. It hardly matters to me who comes in first as long as Obama and Edwards both finish ahead of Hillary

[Cameron27]

12. It matters to me.

[Stop Cornyn]

13. Fixed it.

Of course, Edwards has a much better health care plan than Obama and there are some Obama votes I would wish away if I could so I shouldn't say "it hardly matters" but in the grand scheme of things either Edwards or Obama would be so much better than Hillary that I am not going to quibble.

[Cameron27]

14. I don't even agree with you that he's better then Clinton,

but that's ok, everyone's entitled to their own opinion.

[Stop Cornyn]

15. I'm a liberal so I'm sure there are plenty of things we don't agree about.

[Cameron27]

16. I think Clinton's record stands up well to John's.

I'm as liberal as anyone else and I don't buy into rhetoric alone.