IF Edwards win Iowa, who will then be the Dem nomination?

[TeamJordan23]

I have nothing against Edwards, but I just don't see what is strategy will be after Iowa. He is running far behind Clinton/Obama in NH and SC. I just don't believe he would enough of a bounce to jump either of them in NH and SC.

I think an Edwards win will likely help Hillary win the nomination. What do you guys think?

IF Edwards win Iowa, who will than be the Dem nomination?

[MadBadger]

1. I just have no idea, thats why I chose Other

If Edwards wins Iowa, but Obama finishes in second, then I think NH is still up in the air. But I think that if Obama drops to third, Clinton takes the nomination.

[FlyingSquirrel]

2. In reality, Iowa is almost a must-win for Edwards

Not that you're hearing anyone say that in the media, but he's in third place right now with way less money than Clinton or Obama. I think he may view it as a must-win situation, although he's too smart to ever say that out loud. He at least needs to come in a very close second.

[Radical Activist]

3. At some point there needs to be one progressive alternative to Clinton.

Hillary will always have a solid 33%. If Edwards and Obama continue to split the progressive vote it will allow Hillary to win with her 33%

[Lucinda]

4. Obama has plenty of money to stick it out if JE takes Iowa. I don't think we'll know much

until we see where NH lands. If Edwards takes Iowa he could also end up with NH. He's getting great press right now. And, as we've seen, things can turn quickly.

[Capn Sunshine]

7. exactly what I was going to post

Edwards could take Iowa, but we have enough money to remain competitive until February.

[Tejanocrat]

5. If any candidate wins both Iowa and New Hampshire, I think that candidate would run the table

[The Traveler]

6. I think everybody

is standing on sand with the tide coming in. In other words, the public mood is shifting rapidly under the pressure of events. Polls do mean something, but it is always difficult to know with certainty what meaning they actual convey. And right now I think discerning that meaning reliably is especially difficult.

Given all this uncertainty, I think the best thing for people to do is listen to the words and probe the feeling and the reasoning behind them. And then stand with the candidate that best represents you ... regardless of their "electability".

[JDPriestly]

8. Iowa is the best place to test the candidates' approaches.

The candidates don't really disagree that much on what needs to be done. Their disagreement is about how to achieve what needs to be done. Edwards is presenting a clear choice to Iowans. Obama promises hope; Hillary promises a DLC approach of compromise; Edwards promises an in-your-face, aggressive challenge to the status quo in D.C. and a fight for middle/working class interests.

Iowa Democrats are the best "market" in which to test these three approaches. That is because they resemble the swing voters that Democrats need to persuade to vote Democratic in 2008. (If you doubt me, think about the fact that their two senators are Grassley and Harkin, quite different in their approaches). New Hampshire Democrats have a rural, but more east coast mentality and are not as representative of the nation as a whole. If Iowans go for Edwards' strong approach, it is likely that the majority of Americans will also go for it in 2008.

[On the Road]

9. Support is Still Fluid

After Iowa, every poll will drift towards the winner. With a big win, Edwards could easily do a Huckabee and be the front runner overnight. It might even turn out to be a horse race despite the best efforts of the party.

[Quixote1818]

10. Everything is packed together now so Edwards would just ride the wave

of Media attention to one win after another just like Kerry did.

[knight_of_the_star]

11. Not quite the same there though

Kerry had more solid support in NH going into Iowa, by having the ducks lined up there he set up a nasty one-two punch that swept the election. Not sure if Edwards has the means to pull it, but it will make it a race if nothing else.

[robcon]

12. Iowa means very little.

Has not determined the candidate in a long, long, time.

It will be between Obama and Clinton after Iowa and New Hampshire.

[zanne]

13. NH will not go to Edwards.

He's not as popular here. The nomination from NH will be either Hillary or Obama. They're in a dead heat. Edwards polls fall way behind theirs.

[robcon]

14. But Edwards will stay in until Feb 5, IMO.

He'll be a distant third, but he won't quit until the candidate is (almost or actually) determined.

[Tesha]

15. If Edwards wins Iowa, we'll probably switch our NH votes to him.

Here at the Tesha family, we're Kucinich people. We've
given money and we'd love to give our votes to Dennis.

But stopping Hillary from causing a General Election
calamity (anti-coat-tails and all) is more important
so if Edwards wins Iowa, we'll probably vote for him
in the NH Primary.

We're likely going to see him tonight, but mostly
because Bonnie Raitt and Jackson Browne are supposed
to be there. Hopefully, Browne won't lead off with
"Running on Empty" ;).

Tesha