Is Hillary sacrificing Iowa to Edwards to hamstring the Obama campaign?

[JackORoses]

Her team seems to have made the conscious decision to continue attacking Obama and bringing up Cocaine repeatedly, even in apologizing.
The media is happily running with this, getting two birds with one stone... Obama's drug use and Hillary's campaign shambles.

I think her team has made a calculation that if Obama wins Iowa, they are in big trouble.
So they are playing the odds and trying to take Obama down with them, leaving Edwards in the lead.
They do not believe Edwards is a threat elsewhere.

I can only hope this strategy seriously backfires.

[killbotfactory]

1. I thought that's what they were trying to do week or two ago

But this is backfiring on them, and if they continue on this path they will just make Obama stronger.

[maximusveritas]

4. I think they were trying to draw Obama into a fight

that way, he would go down with them or better yet, they could spin it as though he was the one attacking.
Instead, he took the high road and they've been getting all the backlash.

[Bullet1987]

17. Some people in the MSM are already talking as if

Obama is hitting her back and this is back-and-forth when it's not. This is the Clinton campaign acting negative by themselves.

[maximusveritas]

25. Yep, that's clearly where the Clinton campaign is pushing them

We'll see who has enough integrity to resist.

[AX10]

2. I hope it works.

[Dawgs]

3. Well, considering her own supporters are defecting to Obama(not Edwards)...

I don't think it's working.

[oasis]

19. Her supporter(s) defecting? I saw a video with 1 (one) looney auntie type switching to O.

Good riddance to the nut cases.

[Joe the Revelator]

26. This is Hillary's problem, she hates the voters. nt

[oasis]

27. She hasn't got time to hate, but she doesn't suffer fools gladly.(eom)

[Adelante]

5. She would love to win Iowa, natch

But if she can't, then Edwards. That's why she's barely laid a finger on him no matter how negative he went the whole year. This isn't anything new. It's been the strategy, as I've observed it, since at least early summer.

[bunnies]

6. I dont see Hillary intentionally giving up Any state to Anyone.

It doesnt seem like her style.

[TwilightGardener]

7. Yep, she's just following that devious but time-tested strategy of "Just Plain Losing".

[K Gardner]

12. ROFL !!

[kimmerspixelated]

24. I agree.

It scares me how she always has that, "failure is not an option" look about her. I hate to say what I think she is capable of.

[gasperc]

8. as an Edwards supporter, best Christmas gift ever

I hope that Clinton makes this calculated stupid decision. I predicted that Clinton and Obama had no choice but to go after each other, and posted that Clinton felt Edwards was flailing and an Obama win in Iowa would be devastating to Clinton. 4 weeks ago was my prediction.

[hayu_lol]

9. Gotta give you guys credit for attempting to be innovative...

in your barrage of attacks against Hillary.

If she does this, you attack. If she does that, you attack. If she does nothing, you attack.

You really just don't want a woman president do you?

[bunnies]

11. Right.

Because every non-Clinton supporter hates women. Pathetic. :eyes:

[silverojo]

23. No, I just don't want a DLC woman as president

Big difference.

FWIW, I wouldn't want Bill Clinton as president again, either. Is HE a woman...?

[NYCGirl]

10. Naw, the campaign is just fucking up. NT

[Bucky]

15. The Clintons haven't faced a serious primary challenge in 15 years.

I don't think it's fucking up. She's just a little rusty at fighting with Democrats, where the rules state "be a lot less cut throat than against Republicans." She was basically coronated senator in 2000 (and handled the race with serious deftness). Until this past month, she looked untouchable in the 2008 campaign. Scrapping for a nomination is a different skill. I think she'll adjust quickly, but it is a big adjustment.

I don't know if she'll pull it off--I kinda hope she doesn't. But if she does, she'll be a stronger candidate. If they really keep looking frantic, she'll break up quickly. My guess is she's smarter than that.

[knight_of_the_star]

13. I think its just flailing about

That the inevitability thing isn't working and she's losing ground in Iowa so is looking for some way to catch up but it seems Clinton didn't have a backup plan in case it wouldn't work so is trying for something that is just going to turn people off to her.

If Edwards pulls Iowa, with the media having counted him down but not out he might pull out ahead and beat the other two as they duke it out to the end.

[madrchsod]

14. no- it`s collasping all on it`s own

[kenfrequed]

16. Absurd

I see, this is one of THOSE posts.

Well it actually might happen that Edwards is the candidate that most Iowans seem to prefer. (Though Kucinich's numbers might have gotten a boost had the been allowed to friggin debate)

So if Edwards beats out Hillary and Obama is looking anemic we are supposed to somehow believe that Edwards win is merely part of the Hillary vs Obama strategy?

I'm sorry do you get all of your news from CNN?

I believe people are tired of the idea that this is a two person race and are also tired of the fact that Obama nad Hillary are sounding far too much alike with regards to economic issues and the war.

I will tell you this if Edwards picks up DK's plan and goes with universal healthcare I will give him my damned vote and I am about as hardcore a DK fan as you can imagine.

[Cessna Invesco Palin]

18. If they are it's a stupid fucking strategy.

The cocaine thing won't work on Obama for the same reason that the dee-dubya-eye thing didn't cause much damage to *. I have no idea what the fuck Hillary's campaign strategy is supposed to be at this point, but it ain't winning any awards.

[BringBigDogBack]

21. Pretty much agree.

[NewHampster]

20. damn someone figured out the plan

don't tell anyone

[Stop Cornyn]

22. She's attacking the front-runner -- end of story. Both Obama and Edwards benefit from Hillary

third so boosting Edwards is the greatest possible risk for Hillary because it'd likely result in her finishing third (or worse?).

Both Obama and Edwards benefit from helping each other because a 3rd place finish maims Hillary's campaign.

Even though Obama is gaining in the polls, both in the early states and nationally, Hillary still has a HUGE lead over him in the Ginormous-Tuesday states.

If Obama barely beats Hillary in Iowa, but doesn't wound her campaign, she'll still win most Ginormous-Tuesday states which will likely catapult her back into the lead.

The most likely way for Obama to cut Hillary's overwhelming lead in the Ginormous-Tuesday states, so as to prevent this from happening, is to see that Hillary comes in 3rd in Iowa. Obama cannot do that alone, but Obama and Edwards together can help send Hillary back to 3rd (or worse).

It is contrary to Hillary's best interests to boost Edwards or Obama (or Richardson or Biden because if they bump past her, she's TOAST). Hillary's most likely ally (i.e., who Hillary's supporters ought to boost in those precincts where Hillary isn't viable or she has a number of supporters more than she needs to get her delegates but too few to get another delegate) is Kucinich or Dodd, who are not a real threat to finishing ahead of Hillary.

Obama and Edwards, on the other hand, benefit from boosting each other in the hope of setting Hillary back to third (or worse). Given Hillary's overwhelming lead in the Ginormous-Tuesday states, I think Obama and Edwards get almost as much long term benefit from seeing Hillary finish third (or worse) than the benefit they get from winning.

Obama's (and Edwards') goals much be to, first, win and then, second, do whatever they can to cut into Hillary's lead in the Ginormous-Tuesday states by helping her finish as low as possible in Iowa.