There are two contests tomorrow in the Iowa caucuses. No, I do not refer to the Republican race, but to the Democratic one. There is the battle between Clinton-Edwards-Obama for first place, and then there is the battle between Dodd-Biden-Richardson-Kucinich for fourth place. The import of the first contest is obvious, but the second contest matters, too.
If Edwards wins in Iowa and Obama wins in New Hampshire, we could see a situation develop where none of the top three candidates are able to gather a majority of the delegates before the convention. The reason is simple. While Edwards will probably drop out if he doesn’t win Iowa or New Hampshire, Clinton and Obama have too much money and national support to quit before February 5th’s Super Duper Tuesday. And Hillary has some advantages on Super Duper Tuesday. Among the twenty-one states voting for Democrats that day are her adopted homes states of Arkansas and New York, plus regional neighbors New Jersey and Connecticut. California is also friendly turf for the Clintons. If Clinton remains viable, she will probably win the plurality of delegates in Super Tuesday. If the race has already been whittled down to a two-way race between Clinton and Obama, she will probably win a majority of delegates and be well on her way to the nomination.
It might be too late, at that point, for buyer’s remorse. It is better for the Democratic contest to last as long, and involve as many states, as possible. The more candidates in the race the more likely that the race will last and will involve more diversity of opinion.
If Edwards wins Iowa and can go on to win, say, South Carolina, we will be in good shape for a three-way race that lasts a while…maybe even into the convention. And that’s where the second-tier candidates come in. In any brokered convention, you can rely on Biden and Richardson to toss their delegates to Clinton and Kucinich to toss his delegates to Obama. I don’t know where Dodd will throw his delegates, but I doubt they will be with the Clintons.
If you want a long campaign and you want something other than a Clinton restoration, then you should hope that Edwards wins the Iowa caucus and that Dodd wins the fourth place contest. If you’re an anti-Clintons Iowa voter you have really three options.
1) You can vote for Obama, hoping he simply wipes Clinton out and sweeps to victory.
2) You can vote for Edwards, hoping that he can parlay an Iowa victory into victories in other states. However, it still unlikely Edwards can win except in a brokered convention unless Clinton simply implodes before Feb. 5th.
3) You can vote for Dodd as a first choice and if he isn’t viable, switch to 1) or 2).
I advise option three because keeping Dodd in the race is important. It rewards good behavior, it shows that backbone pays off electorally, and it keeps someone in the race that is right on the issues and has the experience and press relations to be president…if given the chance. If Dodd finishes fourth he will not only fight on, but he will surpass expectations and get some new attention. If one of the big three drop out, Dodd could move up. He might even get enough publicity and connect with enough voters to get a shot at the vice-presidency.
So, my recommendation is that Iowa primary voters go to the caucus intending to vote for Dodd. If Dodd doesn’t reach 15% at your caucus, then vote for Edwards. Or Obama. Either way. Just, please…don’t be an idiot and vote for Hillary Clinton.
Sounds about right to me. I sure hope Dodd gets some kind of atta-boy from the Iowa voters for his efforts. Since things might well be over by the time Ohio rolls around it probably won’t matter, but if I was voting tomorrow it would be for Dodd. In this current crop of Dems, he has earned my respect.
Wow, you are too pessimistic by half. Edwards could certainly win this thing. Should he prevail and Iowa and volt to victory the race is transformed. Clinton and Obama stay in ’cause they have enough money to fight until the end, but Edwards will be launched.
Should Edwards win Iowa, but not NH, SC, or NV, he could still win provided NH, SC, and NV and not all won by the same candidate.
Support can materialize very quickly. Edwards can grow his organizaitons in the Feb 5 states to win a few (I can’t even remember which ones vote that day.)
Clinton’s biggest asset is the inevitability schtick. Once she loses that her task is far more difficult.
The thing is, if Edwards does win the noise machine will be after him with a hatched. Does he have a strategy?
I’m not pessimistic. Edwards has almost no path to the nomination. To win, he must win Iowa, come in at least second in New Hampshire, and then hope that Clinton does not win the large plurality of votes on Feb. 5th, which she almost certainly will unless she cannot prevail in any pre-Feb.5th contests.
Check phase three here.
Obama will win Illinois. Clinton will win New York, Arkansas, and probably Connecticut and New Jersey.
That makes it very hard for Edwards to win overall.
Booman,
You are backing an under-funded phony who can’t win. It is really phenomenal: everybody from Openleft to mydd, kos and yourself have now de-facto lined up for Clinton — not overtly oh, God forbid, but de-facto. This must be a class thing: go with the angry rhetoric that you know can’t win, thus re-empower the staus quo, which you will then go on opposing. Appalling, but hopefully irrelevant.
wtf are you talking about?
your dumb-ass endorsement of Edwards.
And Edwards can’t beat whom?
Huckabee?
Romney?
Grandpa Fred?
Ron Paul?
Are you assuming that John McCain will win his nomination and that he will lose to Obama or Clinton but not Edwards?
You are opposing the first well-financed Dem insurgent campaign since RFK. You are opposing the guy who, with his inclusive rhetoric, can deliver the landslide that is needed for the balance in the Senate to really change.
All so you can revel for a little while in partisan lynch-mob fever.
And de-facto, if your fervent wishes come true and independents and cross-over Republicans don’t come to vote massively in the Iowa caucuses and NH primary for Obama, but stay home or vote McCain, the cadeau you will inevitably get is a HRC nomination.
I am sorry but it is baffling to me, bafflingly stupid.
Where are Edwards’s strikingly different policy postions that would remotely justify this? Instead: Crowd-pleasing rhetoric, pseudo-radicalism — the kind the high-earning urban latte drinking crowd likes.
“Too fucking bad, we lose again. Too bad the Senate is hung and nobody can raise my taxes.”
Ah the good conscience of the Urban Liberal…
Our local young Democrats group here is having a caucus watching party Thursday night but is first doing mock caucuses as an educational exercise. (Yes, they invited us old people too.) We actually were a caucus state through the 1984 election – I caucused for Gary Hart. But the young people don’t remember it.
I just said last night at ShowmeProgress that I would be there caucusing for Dodd so that when he wasn’t viable I could be wooed by all the other viable groups.