Edwards or Clark has to drop out after Feb. 3rd

[ringmastery]

The race has to become a two man race between Kerry and either Clark/Edwards for them to beat Kerry. Clark and Edwards are cannobolizing each other and eating into their base in the south.

[lancdem]

1. But there's a good chance each one might win a primary Feb. 3

so I doubt they would if that happens.

[in_cog_ni_to]

2. Clark has a lot of money

he ain't goin' nowhere! He's in this for the long hall. Bye Johnny.

Go Wes!

[Ivote]

4. A soldier never quits

[arewethereyet]

13. they also know that discretion is the better part of valor

and when, for the sake of the soldiers, its time to lay down their arms.

Its time.

[jenk]

9. less $$$ than Edwards, less support as well

[mohc]

3. The problem is...

...they will both be looking at the other to do it. Edwards seems poised to win SC, and do well in MO, OK, and NM. Clark should win OK, and do well in NM, AZ, and possibly ND. Clark will probably come out with less delegates than Edwards does on 2/3, but Edwards has the benefit of getting a lot of those from neighboring SC. Although OK is a neighboring state for Clark as well, the expectation has not really been played up for him to win it. My guess is they will both stay in at least until the week after, with VA and TN being the only states in play. That might be able to decide who the "southern candidate" is.

[Ivote]

5. Don't forget fl

[DjTj]

6. Feb.10 is the battleground...

Whoever comes out on top in VA and TN will stay in and the other will have to drop out.

[spooky3]

12. LOL! By the end of this campaign, you'll have 20 Johnny lookalikes in your

sig. line, DjTj! In all fairness, don't you think Shawn and Ashton ought to have a quote too? :-)

[mikehiggins]

7. Guys, nobody is going to "drop out"

unless they simply run out of money.

Kerry is not such an overwhelming opponent that any of the other three feel that they cannot beat him in the field, or at least make this campaign drag on until the convention.

With a short season and proportional delegate counts, a four man field tends to suggest nobody will be able to get a clear majority before the convention.

Don't forget, super-delegates "pledges" cannot be counted upon until the votes are cast--until then "commitments" aren't worth the paper they're written on. Go ask Gary Hart about that.

If Kerry doesn't win clearly before the convention then everyone is going to have to take another look at his "electibility" and his ability to pull through in a crunch.

And in regard to Kerry supporters on DU; we just went through months of "bow down before the frontrunner" with Dean. It got real old, real quick then just like now.

Good luck with the front runner thing.

[Auntie Bush]

8. Why should either one drop out

until one has been defitately shown to be less electible all over the country? (Of course if Edwards should drop out...that would be fine with me! But I suppose that is hoping for too much.)

A race between a liberal/northerner via a moderate/Southerner would be a really exciting race. The media should love it. Maybe we should point out if they help Kerry get elected the horserace will be over and just plain boring to report. Maybe then they will give Clark more media attention before it is too late.

[jpgpenn]

10. pssst! This is a Democracy we live in.

[Lurking Dem]

11. By all means

the two candidates with the best chance of a good showing on Feb. 10 should drop out before then. :shrug:

[spooky3]

14. I suspect you're right about the cannibalizing, but how do we know

whether it's these two who are eating into each other's base in the south, versus, for example, Kerry's and Clark's splitting the veterans' vote, or Kerry's and Edwards' splitting the vote of people for whom the IWR vote is not as big an issue as Senate experience and positions on health care, etc.?

[pacifictiger]

15. I think the whole south vote thing has been way overemphasized

on the flawed basis of supposed "strategy." The truth of the matter is that, when the party platforms were reversed i.e. republicans were about intellect, free minds and people's rights (Lincoln) and the democrats were about southern plantation money, trade, and suppressed worker votes, the republicans controlled the direction of the country for the most part for around 70 straight years. Now the platforms have all but reversed themselves. The Dems are the prime promoters of free thinkers, and social rights, and the Repubs are the money, trade, suppressed votes. Why do you think that since Nixon, the republican vote has been growing in southern support, while the democratic vote has been growing in the north? I also think this switchover is why in recent years there has been so much support for 3rd party candidates - they're not sure which way is up any more!

Actually I think the changeover really started in a small way when Kennedy was elected with Johnson's southern vote.

[genius]

16. No. There's room for both. Clark is the war hero competition for Kerry

Edwards is better on civil rights than Kerry. That's why we need Kucinich. He's great in all areas.

[Edge]

17. Neither should drop out.

[ibegurpard]

18. Don't be so sure

Each one of them is positioned very well at this time.