Iowa is the only state Edwards can win

[antiimperialist]

John Edwards is strong in Iowa. But unfortunately, in states with a fair amount of minority voters, he stands no chance to win.
Black people are just not attracted to John Edwards, for whatever reason. Hispanics aren't crazy about him either.
Granted, whites are a majority, but you need minorities to secure a victory.
Add to this the fact that in New Hampshire, a state with very few minority voters, Edwards is way behind. Winning in NH would combine with an Iowa win to give him a boost, and maybe get the attention of minorities, but Iowa will not be enough.

There is no dobut in my mind that John Edwards is done, even with a victory in Iowa.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

1. And you know this, how, exactly?

[PresidentObama]

3. The OPer doesn't. It's merely an opinion.

I remember in 2004 when people said Kerry couldn't win Iowa, let alone any other state.

[antiimperialist]

7. It's an opinion

Ever heard of opinoins?
Or are you one of those that want to force people to write "In my opinion" at the beginning of every post in order to make it clear that it's not a fact?
It's obvious it's not a fact.

[PresidentObama]

20. No need to get pissy.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

21. Yet the OP stated it as hard fact. Of course it's obviously an opinion,

but if people are going to state their opinions in such an unequivocal way, it would be unice to know how they arrived at their opinions. Stuff they read on one of the Internets? Something Antie Zelda told them over tea or something the guys down at the bowling alley said? Some talking head on Fox Snooze? Anecdotal "evidence"? Scholarly treatises? Something they pulled out of their ass?

[antiimperialist]

26. i'm sure smart people can tell an opinion vs. a fact

There was no need to say, "in my opinion" because it was clearly one. No fact can predict how manys states a candidate can win. It's a matter of opinion, and the odds are againts Edwards, and it makes you upset.

[PresidentObama]

27. You really seem to have an attitude problem, huh?

[antiimperialist]

31. I didn't have that problem before someone misrepresented my post

[PresidentObama]

33. You let an internet discussion forum post get you that worked up?

[antiimperialist]

37. Yeah, a lot of us do

Look around. Look at the post. This isn't an MSNBC focus group discussion. It's the Democratic Underground.
We often argue heatedly here.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

30. Actually, I'm not upset, because I'm not an Edwards supporter; still undecided.

I'd like to know the basis of your opinion, though, because it doesn't seem to have one, so far.

[antiimperialist]

32. Here's another opinion: You are not undecided

You are an Edwards supporter.
And the basis of my opinion is in my original post.
Can you show me polls to convince me that Edwards does well among blacks?
He does disastrously bad.

[PresidentObama]

35. So now you get to tell others WHO they support?

Really?

[antiimperialist]

I'm guessing who you support. Not telling you who to support

And based on your irrational, illogical response to my comments, I have little doubts that you are an Edwards supporter.

why should we believe you are undecided just because you say so?
You could be lying in order to sound less biased.

[The Velveteen Ocelot]

39. No. I'm NOT an Edwards supporter. I am resolutely undecided, tending toward

Biden. I have no statistics about Edwards because I'm not one of his supporters.

[Mythsaje]

2. Well, get you some dobuts...

They're good for you.

[no name no slogan]

4. Wow, I didn't know all black people spoke with one voice

[antiimperialist]

11. In polls, Edwards does extremely bad among blacks n/t

[PresidentObama]

19. Poll don't decide elections, voters do.

Polls are good to see trends.

But they aren't 100% the full picture.

Even if we post them here on DU as the gospel....

[Skittles]

110. the black folk I know are all over the board

kinda like, well, everyone else :o

[TeamJordan23]

5. Sadly, this is common sense. Edwards goes nowhere after Iowa.

I have not seen him competitive in any other state. NH will still be an Obama/Clinton matchup.

[PresidentObama]

12. I think Obama goes no where if he doesn't win Iowa.

I really see Clinton carrying New Hampshire, if Edwards wins Iowa.

The only way Obama could come back if that happened is South Carolina.

It's semi-crazy to say Edwards goes no where after Iowa.

Merely opinion.

[TeamJordan23]

23. Thank you. You prove my point.

You see Clinton, not Edwards, winning NH. So when would Edwards win again after this Iowa victory? If you think he will come back from near single digits in SC to win, you must be dreaming.

[PresidentObama]

25. So what happens if Edwards wins Iowa, Clinton wins New Hampshire, Obama wins South Carolina?

I know that's a tad bit off topic.

But if Edwards wins Iowa, I think Clinton will win New Hampshire.

I think this race is just TOO hard to predict.

Saying anyone is out after one state is crazy.

And by the way, though they're great measurements of trends, polls don't decide nominees. Voters do.

[TeamJordan23]

38. Edwards' momentum will be lost by the time it gets to Super Tuesday.

And Hillary will be the favorite to win it all on Super Tuesday.

[PresidentObama]

42. I think Obama and Edwards can compete in a lot of the Super Tuesday races.

Has the large level of polling been done on the Super Tuesday states that has been done in Iowa or New Hampshire? I seriously doubt it...

And I bet those states will watch and see what NH and IA does, and how they vote.

[bunnies]

44. NH is Obamas to lose. Not Clintons.

Our largest voting block, independents, are firmly in Obamas corner. An Edwards win wont change that.

[PresidentObama]

47. That's your opinion. New Hampshire is Clinton's to lose. Always has been.

Obama has tied the race up there, but she didn't have double digit leads there at one time for nothing. She obviously has the support there. And depending on how the next week or so plays out, she still has the advantage going into New Hampshire.

[bunnies]

58. Well, speaking as a NH resident...

I dont see the hotbed of Clinton support that you describe. And you're right... she didnt have double digit leads here for nothing. It was name recognition. And if you dont believe it was name recognition, then you have to believe that shes lost massive amounts of supporters. Either way it isnt very good for her.

[The Ghost]

102. I Completely Disagree

I think if Edwards wins Iowa, it will solidify to NH voters that Clinton is not inevitable, and give them more of a reason to vote for Obama who is already doing well there. Some will go to Edwards, but not nearly enough. And if Romney or Huckabee wins Iowa, i think more independent voters will decide to go vote for the Dems, which more than likely means Obama as well.

[PurityOfEssence]

52. Ever heard of a little place called Texas?

Granted, this is an epoll, which is suspect by definition, but bearing in mind that he's been written off by the major media sources, to see him doing this well is quite interesting...

http://www.txdemocrats.org/candidates/eprimary_poll_results

[cascadiance]

57. They probably said that about Carter BEFORE he won Iowa too!

Momentum can build a lot of support, and as the primary moves closer for other states, it becomes less of a popularity contest and more a contest where voters study positions. I think that's where Edwards can build momentum, especially with a win in Iowa behind him.

[itsrobert]

6. LOL, keep telling yourself that

Edwards does best against Republicans out of all the candidates.

[TeamJordan23]

9. Are you really expecting like a 20 point surge in NH from an Iowa win?

Kerry was doing well in NH before his Iowa win. Edwards is not doing well there.

[chimpymustgo]

8. Wrong!! This black woman has supported JRE since he ran for the Senate in NC!

Why the negative sh*t! Edwards is surging. How about this scenario? His support in Iowa will push him to strong finishes in NH SC and Nevada. Clinton or Obama will fold. Edwards will win the nomination.

I hope!

[antiimperialist]

13. George Bush's Iowa win didn't push him in NH

It is not guaranteed.

[PresidentObama]

15. Nothing is guaranteed.

But saying he's toast after Iowa is rather idiotic.

Especially if he wins Iowa. If he wins Iowa, he's in this race for the long haul.

[onehandle]

10. Ha ha ha! That's the most ridiculous thing I've read on DU in minutes!

Kerry was propelled to the nomination by Iowa in 2004.

Nice try.

[antiimperialist]

16. Then why wasn't George w. Bush not propelled in NH?

The exception disproves the rule.

[TeamJordan23]

18. Kerry was competitive in NH before his Iowa win. Edwards is not. nm

[PresidentObama]

22. I've seen signs of life in Edwards NH operation in the past few weeks.

If he wins Iowa, finishes well in New Hampshire...he's still in this...

[saltpoint]

14. John Kennedy will never win in West Virginia.

O wait. That just might not be correct after all.

http://www.multied.com/elections/1960state.html

_ _ _ _

We ought to just wait and see how things shake out.

Voters can get real independent when they want to.

[cali]

17. I'm not as sure as you are

I do see it as possible that a win in Iowa could translate into a win in NH and that could give him enough serious momentum to be competitive in SC, NV and the super Tuesday states. That said, it's quite unlikely that it will happen- and not just because of his lack of minority support. Edward's supporters don't like to deal with it, but his resources are very limited.

[Andy823]

73. When will you understand

It's the "PEOPLE" who elect the nominee, not the "money"!

A few months ago I heard the same crap from Clinton and Ewards supporters about Iowa, that Edwards did "not" have the money to win, and the polls provide it! Well the polls are showing they he does have a "great" chance to win, so once again the idea that he doesn't have the resources, money, to keep on going is just false!

Now I will agree it will be tough with the "Clinton Obama" media pushing them in every race, but the American people may just surprise you, and vote for the "best candidate" instead of the one with the most money!

[cali]

86. It would be nice if that was true, pangloss

but it's not. Money is what makes elections go round. I want it changed, but I'm not doing your denial type of thing and pretending that it doesn't matter in this election cycle. If it didn't matter, 527s wouldn't be pouring money into Iowa for Edwards. I've never said Edwards couldn't win Iowa, so don't throw the words of others at me- and, as a matter of fact, why don't you show some evidence of your claim that people were saying that here. I'm not convinced that he's the best candidate anyway. The one candidate who's actually put it on the line working against poverty, isn't JE. It's Obama- who actually made sacrifices. I'm big on that in leaders.

[TwilightGardener]

24. My only hope is that Hillary doesn't win Iowa. If Obama wins, yay.

If Edwards wins, game still on. I don't know if he can overtake the others, though.

[sellitman]

28. Not a vote counted and yet he is done?

You should of emailed him earlier so he wouldnt have wasted so much time and effort.

:sarcasm:

[LSK]

29. didnt he win the South Carolina primary in 2004?

:shrug:

[antiimperialist]

34. Thanks. I forgot to factor in the likelyhood of Edwards inventing a time machine

and traveling to 2004 when there was no Obama or popular-among-blacks Hillary to defeat.

[PresidentObama]

36. One, lose the attitude. Two, no votes have been cast.

Thank you :)

[antiimperialist]

41. Are you a psychologist or something?

Lose your irrationality. Edwards has no chance. And I know no votes have not been cast. Should we sit back and not analyze anything until after the results are released?

Lose your psychologist attitude.

[PresidentObama]

45. Edwards has no chance? Wow, what a baseless piece of opinion.

Fine, carry on.

If you want to look like an angry know-it-all, go ahead.

[antiimperialist]

48. It took you a while to figure out that I thought Edwards has no chance

I thought the fact that I think Edwards can only win Iowa would have make u realize that I don't think he has a chance.

Very smart, Mr. irrational psychologist.
By the way, I am still waiting for you analysis.

[PresidentObama]

53. Wow, what an HIGHLY educated post you've just posted.

Saying Edwards has no chance, but yet no votes have been cast. I'm glad you know it all, and the Edwards campaign knows nothing. Sorry, I've been so mistaken.

By the way, the word you is three letters. Not one. If you weren't so obsessed with posting your attitude filled posts, you could take the less than two seconds to type out the FULL word.

Thank you :)

[antiimperialist]

56. Haha, typical reaction of those who are losing an argument. Criticize spelling

Spelling does not make an argument weaker or stronger than it is.
By the way, you are still assuming my opinion was a fact.

[PresidentObama]

59. I'm just trying to point how increasingly pissy you're becoming.

When you can't even take the time to spell out you.

There is NO argument to lose here.

Your opinion is your opinion.

It's not based off fact. No voters have cast their votes.

We can sit here and go back and forth all day, and it's meaningless when no one has voted yet.

Saying he's toast after Iowa literally makes me laugh.

[antiimperialist]

63. And what is the percentage of words that I mispell?

If I spell 99.9% of words correctly, does it mean I am not too pissed?

And even if I were pissed, I am right, and that is more important than being pissed or not.
By the way, you are so upset that you use the low-class word "pissed" instead of say, "upset".

Why are you so upset?

p.s.: Give me you long-awaited analysis.

[PresidentObama]

65. "And even if I were pissed, I am right," Stating opinion doesn't make you right.

AGAIN, no votes have been cast.

Period.

[antiimperialist]

68. Again, we can't stop making predicitons and providing opinion until after the votes are cast

Making predictions and providing opinions is what we are here for.
See you on January 4th.

[PresidentObama]

71. I understand that, but you just suggested you're right.

How can you be right?

Votes haven't been casted.

[antiimperialist]

60. And by the way, in internet lingo, "u" is used to replace "you"

But again, you are losing an argument, after having provided zero analyzis, so grammar is your last resort.
Now you can go back to hope the impossible happens: That Edwards win the primaries.

[PresidentObama]

64. You can't "lose an argument" when you're post is merely opinion, and no votes have been cast.

I think you're OP quite honestly was piss poor.

You did nothing in regards of proving or disproving your own opinion.

I think it's insane to say Edwards is toast after Iowa.

The only way I see Edwards toast after Iowa, is if he doesn't finish in the top three.

[antiimperialist]

66. Calm down, Kerry. You are about to have a heart attack

Can you say why it's insane to say Edwards is toast in Iowa?
You provided conclusions, not the premises, to back them up.
You are losing the argument. And not, arguments cannot only be lost when discussing facts. If you provide weak evidence to back up your opinions, you lose the argument. You have actually provided no evidence.

[PresidentObama]

69. I don't think you can lose an argument when no votes have been cast.

You can say: Edwards is toast.
I can say: No he's not.

Are either of us right?

At this point, no.

It's merely opinion.

You're obsessed with winning an argument that can't be won. All the polls in the world are meaningless when the votes are cast. All the money they've spent on advertisements is meaningless when the votes are cast.

I think it's hard to say you're right, I'm wrong, when your OP proved no evidence to back up your opinion. And your opinion can't be backed up, nor mine, by fact...because voters haven't voted yet.

[antiimperialist]

70. Yes, I provided evidence

Ever heard of polls? Polls tell you that an insignificant number of blacks support Edwards.

[PresidentObama]

75. Polls aren't the end all.

They're measurements of trends, but in the end...polls don't decide, voters do.

And what happens in Iowa, whether you admit it or not, matters.

How much does it matter? We'll see...

But the key here is this.

No votes have been cast. None. Not one. Nada. Zip. Zero.

You aren't right.

Nor am I.

Not yet.

[PurityOfEssence]

46. Edwards: 45%; Kerry: 30%; Sharpton: 10%; Clark: 7%; Dean: 5%; Lieberman: 2%; Kucinich: 1%

A rather resounding victory, actually...

Both Clinton and Obama have strong support in SC right now, but if Edwards is suddenly perceived as having a chance, that can all change.

He only lost Oklahoma to Clark by less than four tenths of a percent, too, and the state is quite purple...

There are other states where he has good chances, too...

[antiimperialist]

50. Different candidates, 4 years ago

Sorry, not convincing.

[elizm]

51. The ONLY one he won....and he is WAY behind here in SC now. nt

[Maddy McCall]

40. I'm sure the minority voters on DU appreciate you speaking for them.

Which is even more funny, considering your user name.

[antiimperialist]

43. Let's talk about polls

Wanna talk about how Edwards fares among blacks in polls?

[Maddy McCall]

61. Edwards won South Carolina in 2004.

[elizm]

67. It's the ONLY state he won....and his is WAY behind here now. nt

[Maddy McCall]

74. He was "way behind" in Iowa two months ago, too.

Now he's surging. If he wins in Iowa, that surge will translate to other states.

[elizm]

77. Oh, OK....On a wing and a prayer is what you're going with. nt

[Maddy McCall]

80. It's easy to distinguish the supporters of other candidates.

I support no candidate at this time. I've not chosen one. Not Edwards, not Obama, not Clinton.

But it's undeniable that an Edwards win in Iowa will translate into other victories in other primaries.

[TeamJordan23]

83. Edwards has never been 'way behind' in Iowa. It's been a three-way tie for as long as I can remember

With a slight edge to Clinton.

[PresidentObama]

85. Actually, earlier in the year...Edwards had a commanding lead in Iowa.

[Maddy McCall]

88. That lead faded to him trailing by double digits, according to some polls.

I think the bottom line is this: the media have spoonfed the American public that Obama and Hillary would win Iowa. I think voters have Hillary and Obama fatigue, and they are taking a new look at Edwards.

At any rate, it's going to be interesting to watch from Mississippi.

[Maddy McCall]

87. "way behind" is subjective.

However, he's trailed Obama and Clinton by double digits in the past couple of months. I'd define that as "way behind."

You might not, though.

[elizm]

49. Here in SC, his home, only state he won in 2004, he is WAY behind...

That should tell people SOMETHING.

[NCarolinawoman]

62. Also, in his other home--NC, He gets 3% of the African American vote.

Among all Democrats here, he usually polls from 25% to 27%. Hillary is polling ahead of him right now.

[elizm]

79. And he says WHO is living in Never, Never Land???

He's losing in his birth state and home states. And somehow an Iowa win is going to pull the whole thing off??

[kurth]

54. The 2008 election will be decided by pissed-off white voters

[phillyliberal]

55. well the thing that troubles me

is that the ideas and stances Edwards takes on a variety of issues has the greatest impact on minority voters throughout the country. It's too bad a lot of the them aren't seeing this.... the whole poverty campaign is one that greatly affects a large portion of African Americans in particular..

[elizm]

72. And why would African Americans think Edwards would do more for those in poverty...

...than Barack Obama would? What did Edwards ever do on poverty before he 'decided' he wanted to run for President? Obama walks the walk. Edwards talks the talk. Who should you put your hope and trust in??

[Maddy McCall]

81. Just as I thought.

Your responses to others in this thread are explained by the subjectivity you present here.

[knight_of_the_star]

76. And your proof for these assertions is?

Where do you have proof beyond what flies out of your butt that he can't win minority voters?

[Yukari Yakumo]

107. Let's check the map

Note all the states Edwards does not show up in, especially in lighter colored states where polls have recently been taken.. He polls at less than 15% of the vote in those states.

And unlike '04, there are way, way, waa~aay fewer undecided this time around.

A win in Iowa will be a Pyhrric victory for Edwards.

[melody]

78. There's no doubt in my mind that a win in Iowa means he's got a fair shot at the nom

I've thought for some time that John had a good chance of hanging on and emerging as a contender. If he wins
Iowa, he's going to emerge as a stronger choice for a lot of Americans. He has been drowned out by the media
focus on Hillary and Barack. Now that the media is getting a bit tired of them, they'll be covering Edwards
to a greater degree. Thus, people will be seeing him anew. His message is especially resonant right now. I
think he has a good shot at the nomination.

[Maddy McCall]

82. I do second this.

I've not chosen a candidate yet, but I do agree with all that you've said here.

[TeamJordan23]

84. Which state would he win after Iowa? nm

[melody]

101. The momentum after Iowa would tell us ... we didn't think he'd win Iowa last week n/t

[stray cat]

89. I hope you are wrong - in 2004 Dean was in and Kerry done in the popular press

[Bluebear]

90. Kerry could win NO state in 2004. Then he won Iowa & what finally happened, exactly?

Who got the nomination, it's so hard to remember. I do remember Kerry having a chili dinner at the firehouse 5 minutes from my house in '04 and I didn't even go, he had like 3% in the polls, then Iowa happened, but who won? I can't for the life of me recall . . .

[Two Americas]

91. As an Edwards supporter...

As a strong and passionate Edwards supporter, I would like to say to all of the good and decent and honest people here who are supporting another candidate, that I will never tell you that your candidate is "done" or "can't win." We may disagree, but I respect your candidate and your views and encourage you to stay passionate and enthusiastic and committed and don't let anyone try to discourage you. We will all be working together soon, and we need courage, we need enthusiasm, we need passion, we need everyone's input and everyone's contributions. A wet blanket thrown on any candidate or the supporters of any candidate hurts all of us.

[Robbins]

92. Race

If Edwards wins In Iowa he should not be written off.NH could be thown Into caoas.The media has been
promating NH as a ClintonObama clash.But If Iowa Is Edwards first,Obama second,and Hillary third
It becomes very Intresting.If a win In Iowa gets him to second place In NH that would be a big deal.
It could also put South carolina Into caoas as well.

[Snotcicles]

94. Well said, spoken like a true Edwards supporter. I'm proud of my fellow Edwards DU er's. nt nt

[MalloyLiberal]

93. Racist a little?

[cali]

99. there's nothing remotely racist about the OP

there's something completely disgusting about throwing out a bullshit charge. In other words, you're disgusting.

[Nutmegger]

95. Hogwash!

Anything else you see in your crystal ball?

[saracat]

96. And your opinion is crap. in Arizona, speaking for hispanics, Edwards State Chair is Rauel Grijavla

.His steering Committe is headed by Leah Landrum Davis, who is black.You are not well informed at all about the edwards Campign or its supporters. Your opinion is based on nothing it seems.You are just wrong.

[antiimperialist]

105. And Hillary destroys Edwards in Arizona, according to latest poll

Do you have the polls to support your claim that Edwards is somehow doing well in this state?
The last one I saw was 1 month and a half ago: http://www.usaelectionpolls.com/2008/polls/pdfs/RMP-2007-IV-08.pdf

[saracat]

109. I make no claims as to Edwards performance in AZ. He is not campaigning here but he definitely has

"minority" support. You are wrong about his not having any minority appeal.That is why I give you the examples I did.

[book_worm]

118. these polls at this point don't mean a thing.

Look at how an Iowa victory pushed John Kerry ahead in NH (where he was behind Dean) and several other states in 2004. The only states which are really at this time concentrating on the presidential race are Iowa and NH.

[weeve]

97. Ha ...

... the corporatist Clintonites must be getting awfully nervous about now. What are Hillary and Barack going to do when the media is FORCED to report on the new frontrunner, John Edwards ?!? He's done this well, being virtually ignored by the (threatened) Big Media ... just think what he could do if he starts getting some fair and balanced reportage ?! Granted they'll spin him as being too angry, and Iowans as a bunch of clueless hicks, but once his message starts coming out with increased coverage, things will change in a big way. And believe me, we REALLY need the change.

[Omaha Steve]

98. A lot can happen before August 2008 and Denver

An affair revealed. An assassination attempt. An embarrassing therapy revealed. A hidden same sex lover. Gambling addiction. Alcohol. You get the point. These things have happened to candidates in the past. The unknown can happen at any time and change history.

[Bluebear]

100. "White people are just not attracted to Barack Obama"

How would that quote fly with you?

[superkia]

103. If the media wants him to win more than Iowa, he will.

First Clinton was topping all of the polls from national name recognition and constant coverage, then the media gave us more and more Obama and made it Clinton against Obama, after enough media coverage people started to support Obama more and it reflected in the polls. The problem was that Obama started to pass Clinton and by a good margin so they had to flood the airwaves with a third candidate(Edwards) so that Obama the new voice, wouldn't runaway with it all and take it from Clinton. The media did the same thing with the republican side, starting with their boy Giuliani, then making it Giuliani against Romney and then flooded the airwaves with the R's third (Huckabee).

When Americans realize that the media is agenda driven and controlled by the elite, maybe we will change the way WE vote. If we continue to vote the same way we will continue to get the same result.

I think its Americans egos that get in the way, there are allot of very intelligent, book smart people that think they know what is going on with our government and politics but they show their ignorance in their own words and actions and dont realize it. We seem to lack Americans with COMMON SENSE and a little street smarts might help also.

[NCarolinawoman]

104. I think you're on to something.

Very good post. :thumbsup:

[Orangepeel]

106. primaries aren't winner take all.

Edwards will win Iowa, which will increase the number of delegates that he will get in New Hampshire, SC and Nevada. At worst, he'll be a close third in each of them, picking up delegates and momentum all the way. That will keep him in until Super Tuesday, where he will be competitive in a lot of states.

[JohnLocke]

108. Edwards has support from the African-American and Latino communities

African Americans For Edwards - http://www.johnedwards.com/iowa/issues/african-americans/
Edwards Gains Support From African American Leaders - http://www.johnedwards.com/news/press-releases/20070627-african-american-leaders/
http://www.johnedwards.com/news/press-releases/20071207-plan-for-opportunity/ - African-American Leaders Discuss Edwards' "Plan For Opportunity For All Americans"
http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/latinos/ - Latinos For Edwards
Prominent Latinos Endorse Edwards For President - http://www.johnedwards.com/news/press-releases/20070629-latinos-endorse/
Edwards Introduces Opportunity Agenda For Latino Americans - http://www.johnedwards.com/news/headlines/20070909-latino-opportunity-agenda/
Asian Americans And Pacific Islanders For Edwards - http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/aapi/
National Asian American and Pacific Islander Leaders Endorse John Edwards for President - http://www.johnedwards.com/issues/aapi/20070419-asian-american-leaders/

Throughout the campaign Edwards has had support from minorities and has directly addressed minorities in talking about health care, urban and rural recovery, hate crimes, poverty, education...I dunno where you've been.

We'll see at the Convention.

[Dawgs]

111. Zero chance he wins any AA support if Hillary or Obama are in the race.

Anyone that tries to pretend otherwise is a fool.

[usregimechange]

112. Iowa changes everything and he is not that far behind in NH

[cali]

114. actually it doesn't..

it simply means he won't be dropping out immediately. NH? A huge number in independents, and they're breaking for Obama. Unlike Kerry, Edwards does not have favorite son status in NH But even if he comes in 2nd in NH, he's faced with S.C. and NV a week later or so. And he just cannot get the African-American voters he needs to win in S.C. Beyond that, there's Super Tuesday. It's almost impossible to see how he'll be competitive in states like NY (Clinton is the favorite daughter there), Illinois (Obama) or CA (he doesn't have the GOTV infrastructure)

[Dawgs]

122. 10% points IS far behind win NH is only 5 days after Iowa.

How do you expect him to make up those votes, especially if Iowa is close between Edwards/Obama/Hillary?

[saltpoint]

113. Governor Carter seems like a nice enough guy, but he's obscure and

really doesn't stand much of a chance in Iowa or New Hampshire.

[cali]

115. comparing what happened three decades ago with the radically

changed political landscape today, just doesn't work.

[saltpoint]

116. Gary Hart defeating Mondale in New Hampshire?

No way.

[book_worm]

117. what an illogical post. Doesn't even take in the historical evidence: Edwards won SC

in 2004 which has a high AA population. He won in NC as a Senate candidate with strong AA support. If he wins Iowa he will, like Kerry in '04 gain a lot of ground fast.

[cali]

120. um, no. unlikely. Kerry wasn't running against candidates with very

strong AA support. Neither Clinton nor Obama is likely to bleed support very quickly even if they come in 2nd and 3rd in Iowa and NH. Edwards has an uphill fight in NH and SC. Conceivably he could do better in NV, but then he faces Super Tuesday with a lot of big states he can't win. NY? Clinton. Illinois? Obama. NJ? Clinton. CA? possible, but it's hard to see.

[book_worm]

129. um, yes, if Edwards wins Iowa

he will get a boost just as John Kerry did in 2004. It will help him in NH, just as it did John Kerry in 2004 who was behind Howard Dean in 2004 until after the Iowa results. South Carolina is his homestate and he has proven he can win there before and still has fair support according to the polls you will see if Edwards wins Iowa and NH that it will get very close in many states including states with minority populations. Do I think that Edwards will win Illinois? No, that's Obama's homestate--but if Clinton is seriously hurt in the early primaries he certainly can come in second. Do I think he will win NY against Clinton? No, again it's his homestate. But as the only Southerner in the race and with some momentum I think Edwards certainly can win some southern primaries including Florida and Texas as well as SC and NC. Oh, and Ohio will be a key primary and I think Edwards will do surprisingly well there especially if he's a winner early on.

[cali]

139. JK had a leg up in NH- he was a favorite son. JE is not.

and the cw is that the boost from Iowa is generally worth about 10 pts in NH- hardly enough for JE SC is not his home state; it's his birth state. He has resided all of his life in NC, and that's where he won his Senate seat Big difference. He polls poorly in SC- and that's where the early primary is- not NC.

The odds are strongly against JE, and it's not only that he faces stiff competition, it's his money and operations/infrastructure problem. GOTV efforts are vital in states like CA and FL. He just doesn't have the infrastructure that Clinton and Obama have- and he's up against spending limits that vary in individual states. It really is unlikely that he can compete

[saltpoint]

119. But Governor Branigan is Indiana's favorite son. No northeastern liberal like

Robert Kennedy could possibly defeat him in the primary.

[saltpoint]

130. Now that Governor Dean has the lead and the momentum in Iowa, he'll

be virtually impossible to stop. If that weren't true, why else would Gore have endorsed him?

Kerry and Edwards? They won't break 15% in the caucuses.

[saltpoint]

136. Santorum's star is rising. He's third in the GOP leadership in the Senate and

the far right sends him fat checks all the time.

Casey's a decent guy but I'm just not seeing him unseat someone as entrenched as Rick Santorum.

[saltpoint]

121. John Glenn? Love the guy. Astronaut, American hero, All-American freckles.

Friendly, too. He'll likely coast to nomination against that guy from Cleveland -- what's-his-name -- Metzenbaum?

[saltpoint]

131. John Kerry's Senate career is done for. Bill Weld will crush him like a grape.

[saltpoint]

123. Feingold? Nah. He has those funny ads, and yeah, they're ok, but his opponents

are way too well-funded and much better known.

[saltpoint]

124. Off the record, we Republicans here in North Carolina are mostly Jesse Helms

Republicans, mind you, but we stick with our own, and Mr. Faircloth will have our support, our money, and our well-established network of uh, local affiliates. Yes. I wouldn't worry about that Mr. Edwards getting very far in this Senate race.

[saltpoint]

125. Kennedy over Nixon? But he's a Catholic!

[durtee librul]

134. Hey Old Crusoe....

Glad to see you again! 65 Rambler Lady here! Love your posts. I think JRE is in it and I think he is going to surprise a lot of people. He has a great message and I actually think once people hear it, he's in.

Again, I live in a really, REALLY red neighborhood and they HATE HRC, They don't trust Obama, think he's a 'nice' guy, but don't trust him. They have said that if they don't like their candidate and JRE is the dem choice, they'll vote for him. For the most part, they can quote ALL of his views and that just frankly amazes me. (course that any repuke can remember anything simply amazes me...lol!!)

Clinton.....she won't win the presidency. There is just too much baggage with her - the only thing she has going for her is her name and of course, Wolf Blitzer and his gang. Ooops, forgot her new fwend, Rupert.

[saltpoint]

138. 65 Rambler. Now there was a car. Good to see you, too, and what a wild

ride we're in for these next few weeks.

Stock up on the wine -- or the heroin -- and we'll see what happens!

[saltpoint]

126. We Iowans have always liked Dick Gephardt, yes. Why, he's a neighbor --

right there in Missouri -- almost in our backyards. And you know, we voted for him before back in 88. It was a big win. Nice family, too. They may be from Missouri, but you know, they're as much Iowans as we are. I'm sure he'll prevail by an even wider margin this time.

[JNelson6563]

135. Fun stuff OC

Good posts all. Cleverly shining a light on the folly of predicting the future with certainty.

:toast:

Julie

[saltpoint]

137. Hey there, JNelson! A warm howdy and a Happy New Year!

[saltpoint]

127. Uh-oh. Carter's had it now. No less a Democratic powerhouse than Ted Kennedy

is challenging him for the nomination.

It's curtains for a second Carternomination for sure.

[saltpoint]

128. OK, McCarthy and RFK are drawing a few people to a few rallies. Maybe

a notice or two in the press.

But that's about it.

I certainly don't see them mounting a significant challenge to a sitting president.

Stick with Lyndon.

[saltpoint]

132. Just read the polls. George Allen's a shoe-in for re-election.

[cali]

140. I don't care how often you repeat inanities, it won't change

the odds. Edwards could win, but any reasonable analysis will tell you just how uphill that battle is.

[JohnLocke]

142. Oh, what bollocks.

[saltpoint]

133. I don't care how well-intentioned Wellstone is, Rudy Boschwitz's seat is safe.

Minnesotans will not elect a liberal of Wellstone's ilk to the U.S. Senate.

[saltpoint]

141. But gentlemen, this is the nomination for the highest office in the land.

It is for the presidency. It is for the future of our young party.

In no conceivable way can we allow it to go to that backwoods hillbilly from Kentucky, Mr. Lincoln.