Edwards supporters, can someone please explain how he can win the nomination if he wins Iowa?

[Dawgs]

If Edwards wins close in Iowa, how does he make up the difference in New Hamshire in 5 days where the indys are going to Obama?

How does he win South Carolina where the African American voter will definitely break towards Obama or Hillary?

How does he win Nevada where he's down 30 points to Hillary?

How does he win New York(Clinton), Illinois(Obama), or California(infrastructure)?

Where does he plan on getting the money to pull off something that appears so impossible?

It's not like he has some great Senate record to fall back on. Maybe he can talk himself into a win.

[MannyGoldstein]

1. People Respect His Experience In A Hedge Fund Specializing In Predatory Lending

It shows that he's for the little guy. They'll come around.

[TwilightGardener]

12. LOL! Thank you for my morning chuckle.

:thumbsup:

[MannyGoldstein]

19. You're Welcome - I Cannot Believe What Edwards Is Pulling Off

PT Barnum seems to have underestimated the rate of suckers born.

[TwilightGardener]

22. Yup. He's a pro, I have to hand it to him.

[Syrinx]

2. the media

They exaggerate everything.

Edwards has the goods to back the talk up.

Edwards is going to kick ass.

I'm not talking about the campaign. I'm talking about the presidency.

I believe Edwards will prosecute Bush and Cheney for their crimes.

Hillary Clinton will not. Barack Obama will not.

John Edwards has seen the light. And I believe that he will hold them accountable.

[BeyondGeography]

4. You mean for pursuing the war he helped to authorize?

[Syrinx]

14. he has apologized for his error

That's more than we have from Senator Clinton.

And he pledges to end the war, and to abolish all US military bases in Iraq.

I agree that Edwards has a record in the Senate that is regrettable.

I think that he sincerely has regrets.

Unlike some senators.

I can't help when I hear Senator Edwards that I believe him.

He will fight for me and you.

Listen to him.

You can support someone that stands by their mistakes.

Or you can support someone that regrets their greatest mistakes, that renounces them, and vows to correct them. And to go further and fight for our families, and our constitution.

[Dawgs]

7. Which crimes? Are you talking about the ones Edwards help sell while in the Senate?

Sounds like you are the one that needs to 'see the light'.

[snot]

3. Look. Edward is my compromise candidate from Kucinich.

If you don't want me to vote for Edwards, it's Kucinich.

I have absolutely no interest in voting for anyone who can't even be bothered to pretend to support my positions on the issues.

[Dawgs]

8. Interesting, since Kucinich likes Obama over Edwards.

[Adelante]

20. Vote for Kucinich

I don't understand this voting for somebody else when Dennis is who you want.

[surfermaw]

25. And you made a good choice

Isn't it kind of funny that the man that spent the least amount of money in Iowa is winning, So why are you worried about how much money Edward's has now... Let the man from the south , like another man from the south Bill Clinton so you how to win with loads of money, aren't you ashamed of Obama and Hillary for letting the man with the least of money spent beat them.

[saltpoint]

5. We put a man on the moon. We can do anything we want.

[MannyGoldstein]

21. I Know People Involved In The Moon Landing

They were against the war, permanent "free" trade status for China, and the Bankruptcy Bill.

I'm not sure that they'd like you invoking them in the election of Edwards.

[saltpoint]

24. Manny, hi. Go for the trajectory here. The history of surprise and its

often unpredictable components in U.S. politics.

The will to impose a viewpoint versus the exploration of the unknown.

In Iowa in 1976 the top three or four candidacies for voters' consideration were Jimmy Carter, Morris Udall, Fred Harris, and Birch Bayh. The three I favored lost to Gov. Carter.

Demographics are fluid in both the private and the public sector. We simply don't know what's going to happen quite a bit of the time.

[surfermaw]

26. Second landing a southern boy was there

Charles Duke, of South Carolina and North Carolina....

[chimpymustgo]

6. Win Iowa. Strong 2nd or very close 3rd in NH. Momentum builds to SC - strong 2nd

Either Hillary or Obama will fade. A 2 person race favors Edwards on electability and momentum.

[cali]

11. well, at least that's in the real world ballpark.

However, even if Clinton or Obama fade in the run up to Super Tuesday, he can't compete with them on that day. He doesn't have the infrastructure and that's built on money that he doesn't have either. A 2 person race between Edwards and Obama definitely favors Obama. A two person race between Edwards and Clinton, slightly favors Edwards, but again, he's hampered by his limited resources. Ad if he's second or third in both NH and SC, it's hard to see him as competitive with the frontrunner.

[Ravy]

9. By getting more votes than the other people. nt

[book_worm]

10. Kerry made up a lot of ground in NH after his Iowa victory in '04

in a relative short time. In South Carolina (which he won in '04) he has a core of support already if he gets momentum he will gain more ground. His populist message will help. Will he be meeting a strong or damanged Clinton and Obama there? He will get some of the AA vote but lets say that Hillary and Obama split that vote, Edwards, can still win if he can connect with enough of the other voters with his message. He's also the only real southerner in the race which will be helpful. He doesn't have to win NY or IL, what he needs to do is make a decent showing there. I think his big test will be Ohio and I think he has a good shot of winning there. I think he also can do well in other Southern primaries like Florida. A 30-point edge for Hillary in Nevada at this point when all the attention is on Iowa and SC is not all that big of a deal. How many people in Nevada are really focused on the presidential race? not many. And if Hillary is damanged in the early primaries her support will drop off pretty fast. In national polls it's wide but I doubt (given how it's collapsed in Iowa and NH) it's very deep.

It's nice to see how Clinton and Obama supporters are suddenly turning onto Edwards now that it looks like he has a very real chance to win Iowa.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. The CW Says Edwards Has No Post Iowa Strategy

Gary Hart had no post New Hamphire strategy and he almost knocked off Walter Mondale...

We shall see...

But as an HRC supporter I'm gratified to see the Obama supporters direct their animus to John Edwards...

[book_worm]

15. From what I've heard he does have a post Iowa strategy

to use any Iowa momentum to gain ground for a solid second in NH which will mean either a damaged Hillary or Obama and then go for the win (as he did in '04) in SC.

[OHdem10]

16. The Most Important thing Edwards does is keep a real

Democrat Message front and center. Both HRC and Obama are picking
up his message. This brings them from the Right.

If Edwards wins, he gets a natural bump and money. People in
the next states will look more seriously and some will switch
to support him, just as they did for Kerry.

[cali]

17. what does money matter if he can't spend it?

He's already spent at least half of what he's legally allowed to spend through August.

[Adelante]

23. He's banking on the 527s

That's the game plan from what I've gathered from supporters on DU. The "independent" groups can spend what he can't. They will worry about paying FEC fines down the road as they did after 2004.

[PATRICK]

18. History?

Maybe someone better versed than myself could explain how RFK MIGHT have defeated HHH. He came in late, had pretty fixed enemies in the infrastructure establishment, had little time or in the pre-reform days, little hope he could win in the primaries themselves.

The major hope for Edwards? The same, except there is less leeway for a brokered convention and the swaying of internal party super delegates. Edwards may not be anywhere as divisive as RFK but the game is a lot faster and raw. Win the people and you win the nomination. When the wary establishment backers of Hillary see her shaken and start wanting to cling on the coattails of a better hope then the internal landslide begins, even if the people are not able to switch around fast enough for a "logical" hope in the frontloaded primary season. They must realize their own window of choice will be very narrow. Obama would have to sink very fast and Edwards rise very fast and a wise assist given by the organizational leaders who see at last an attractive gamble to offset damaging the Clinton candidacy and incurring disfavor. Brokered conventions are much harder to see as a likely scenario at all.

So, in effect, Edwards has to start beating Clinton on the popular uprise against many, many physical odds. I think he has planned for that but that the plan is late in peaking. He may have just enough time to show he is the best campaigner and that Hillary is extremely vulnerable. He does that and Hillary may not even take New York. If Hillary succeeds only by splitting her doubters in the party into inaction or weak support, she will have one of the weakest nominations in my memory. If the party pros can't see that then they are scoring pretty consistently for this year.

To some extent Hillary has to lose the race. She has done some of that, unfortunately, because it frightens me immensely to see a potential candidate turning sour. Edwards has to win smartly and money and media dampen even the chances. He has done very well and seems to know how this will work out better than any of his supporters here can guess.

Now I see on TV that Bloomberg is checking in, finally. If Hillary wins, count on it.