The Consequence of winning Iowa for each ot the top tier candidates

[Perky]

HRC is currently up my a small margin in Iowa. I suspect that if she wins it is all over....on the other hand if she finishes second ot third she is toast beacuse the inevitability factor is gone and New Hampshire are gpoing to start looking around.

If Obama wins lily-white Iowa...I also think its over because he is likable...has proven "something" and will have huge momentum.

If Edwards wins. it will have some effect...but I suspect that he would have to validate it with a win in NH to have any real momentum.

[Ninja Jordan]

1. "if she finishes second...she is toast"

Not hardly.

Placing second in Iowa would be a pretty big victory for Clinton IMO. If she places first, she effectively has ended this contest.

[BeyondGeography]

28. Agreed...if she finishes fourth she might be toast

she can even weather a third place finish. The only candidate who will be toast at #2 is Edwards; Iowa is a must-win for him.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

2. What If Kucinich Wins It?

eom

[Perky]

3. What is Kucinich polling at in Iowa?

[DemocratSinceBirth]

4. It's A Caucus....

And the Kuninich people are highly motivated.

[Perky]

5. They would have to be...but that was not my question

[DemocratSinceBirth]

6. Polls Are Unreliable In Caucus States Because Not Every Voter Participates

eom

[Ninja Jordan]

9. Dennis Kucinich isn't winning Iowa, buddy eom.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

10. "Without Hope The People Perish"

.

[Ninja Jordan]

12. Apparently Dennis doesn't hope he wins. He has no field offices or infrastructure in the state.

[Apollo11]

7. Everything depends on Iowa

If Edwards wins the Iowa caucuses, even if he comes second in NH, he could go on to win South Carolina and Nevada. Then everything is up for grabs.

I don't believe what Hillary and Obama's people are suggesting, that it won't matter if Edwards wins Iowa, because you have to look at the national picture.

They don't believe that for one second.

Just look at how much time Hillary and Obama are spending in Iowa.

Remember back to 2004. Kerry wins Iowa and suddenly he is the frontrunner.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

8. OK

1) Edwards can not afford to lose Iowa.

2) Obama can not afford to lose Iowa and New Hampshire.

3) Hillary can not afford to lose Iowa and New Hampshire.


The candidate will be one of those three... I would literally bet my home and car on that proposition, barring an "act of God"...

[Ninja Jordan]

11. The candidate will not be one of those three

It's very plausible that a candidate will win NH but not Iowa.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

13. The Eventual Nominee Will Be Clinton, Edwards, Or Obama...

The other candidates, for a host of reasons, will not be the nominee...

[Apollo11]

14. or an "Act of Gore"

Just in case he decides to enter the race sometime in the Fall.

THE LAST TEMPTATION OF AL GORE
By Eric Pooley
TIME Magazine -- May 17, 2007
Let's say you were dreaming up the perfect stealth candidate for 2008, a Democrat who could step into the presidential race when the party confronts its inevitable doubts about the front runners. You would want a candidate with the grass-roots appeal of Barack Obama -- someone with a message that transcends politics, someone who spoke out loud and clear and early against the war in Iraq. But you would also want a candidate with the operational toughness of Hillary Clinton -- someone with experience and credibility on the world stage.
In other words, you would want someone like Al Gore -- the improbably charismatic, Academy Award-winning, Nobel Prize-nominated environmental prophet with an army of followers and huge reserves of political and cultural capital at his command.
...
http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,1622597,00.html

Let's all find ways to show our support for Al Gore! :patriot:

Visit Al's site www.algore.com and read his blog http://blog.algore.com

Sign the petitions at www.algore.org and www.draftgore.com

Visit www.americaforgore.org and send Al Gore your two cents!

:kick:

[AtomicKitten]

42. we should be so lucky

[sampsonblk]

15. Its not going to be over in one fell swoop

Times have changed. All the top candidates have enough money to keep going for a while. But I do believe that the field will shrink quickly after the first few states chime in.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

16. I Agree

But it's hard to see the eventual winner losing both of them...

Bill Cinton lost both of them in 92 but he didn't seriously contest IA because Harkin was running and he placed a strong second in NH which was Paul Tsongas' neighboring state...

[sampsonblk]

18. Yep

I was for Tsongas back then. He was a great guy.

I agree with you on the issue of losing both of them. Of course the changes in the schedule have really thrown me off. My mind has not accepted that things are not as they've always been.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

21. Yeah...

There are a lot of changes...

I have seen some astute observers say HRC could lose both IA and NH and prevail because of her organization but I don't see it...

If someone wins both NH and IA that person will probably win the nomination ...

I'm just reasonably certain it's going to be Clinton, Obama, or Edwards...

[Debi]

26. I keep responding to you when you're not even talking to me

sorry about that. Remember that a strong win in New York, California, Illinois or Florida wipes out all the delegates earned in the first four contests.

And NY, CA, IL are all going only three weeks after Iowa.

I think a candidate with a strong organization in any of those states could take losses in the early states and still come out the winner in several states (and have the most delegates) on February 5th.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

32. It Has Nothing To Do With Numbers And Everything To Do With Momentum Or Physics...

An object in motion stays in motion...If any candidate wins both IA and NH that candidate will have such a boost that it will carry him or her through the primary season...

[Debi]

34. But NV is in between and that could give someone else momentum

AND a ballot already cast cannot be undone. So an organized absentee ballot program in a large state could help a candidate who performs poorly in an early state.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

36. Didn't Edwards Pull His Resources From Nevada To Focus On Iowa?

I guess Nevada makes it dicier but if someone wins IA, NV, and NH you can just about close the barn door...

[Debi]

39. Some, not all and I don't know if it was because of how he was performing in Iowa

or that Nevada didn't need as much as planned. (I don't know the makeup of Nevada Democrats - but I thought I saw a map that had them rather concentrated in one area making it easier to organize there).

I still think states that have early mail-in voting will throw a wrench into the works if a candidate has the resources to organize an absentee ballot program. :shrug:

[DemocratSinceBirth]

43. I Would Suspect The Media Is Going To Follow The Early Caucuses And Primaries...

Any candidate can theoretically stay in the race to Denver... I'm just interested in who will actually win...

[Debi]

49. I'm sure they will

I'm just saying that a candidate who is doing well prior to Iowa/Nevada/New Hampshire/South Carolina COULD try and capitalize on that by getting people to cast their ballots BEFORE Iowan's/Nevadan's/New Hamshirites/South Carolinians have their say. It could have an effect on the delegate count.

[Debi]

23. But right now Nevada is in between and South Carolina is close behind NH

You could see a different winner in each of the four first contests.

[wyldwolf]

17. You've overlooked some key factors

First, I'll point out you didn't include "Obama loses Iowa" and "Edwards loses Iowa" scenarios. Why?

But factors you've missed are:

Clinton is WAY out front in NH with less days between Iowa and NH than usual. That means less time for her to lose momentum.

We'll be getting preliminary provisional ballot results from California at the same time we get Iowa results. Clinton is so far ahead in CA she'll gain momentum from those.

[rinsd]

20. Those absentee ballots are our "secret" weapon.

[Debi]

27. They could win it - even with a slow start in IA/NV/NH/SC

280 delegates will be awarded from NY and 441 from CA. If absentee ballots are collected during the first four contests - a poor showing in those states won't derail the campaign.

[rinsd]

30. It could be a momentum giver going into Sooper-Dooper Tuesday

I think it will be important for the eventual nominee to finish 1st or 2nd in IA though because the condensed schedule does not allow much leeway for any faltering. It would not be fatal to not do so but the task would be that much more difficult.

[Debi]

35. I think the condensed schedule doesn't allow for much 'bounce' from a win

in an early state since the contests are stacked so closely on top of each other. And the same - if a candidate stumbles in an early state there isn't much time for the piranhas to come out. (and if a candidated has banked votes in large states - there is no taking those votes away)

[rinsd]

37. Now that is a different perspective.

Not enough time to build or deflate momentum.

Hmmmm....I'll have to think about that one.

[Debi]

46. That's why the contests were placed 7-8 days apart previously

because after 8 days the 'bounce' becomes less obvious in the media. NOW, maybe with our 24/7 super-hyped media we have that idea no longer applies, but it is why the placing of contests so closely together hurts the winners and helps the losers in this calendar.

[rinsd]

19. I think Hillary or Obama could survive a 2nd place finish in IA because they have the dough.

Edwards has a slightly tougher time if he doesn't win because he is counting on momentum building to carry him thru NH and SC leading up to Sooper-Dooper Tuesday.

But even then he has enough money to stick around and make a run.

[DemocratSinceBirth]

33. I Don't Think Any Of The Top Three Can Afford To Lose Both IA And NH

or conversely the winner of both will go on to win the nomination imho...

[rinsd]

40. If its close in IA & NH between #1 & #2 I think you could survive not winning either.

But one would have to take NV to keep those hopes alive.

[Debi]

22. I don't know if there is any for those who have enough $$ to continue on

into any states after NV/NH/SC.

With absentee ballots in CA (and NY?) going out before Iowa even occurs AND so many states going on February 5th I can't imagine a candidate not trying to stay in through the Super Duper Tuesday contests.

I keep hearing that Iowa is more important than ever this cycle and I guess I don't see it - I see being able to be in the top three/four in all four of the initial states and able to be competitive in some of the Feb. 5th state more important than just 'winning' Iowa.

I hope the race remains competitive longer than one contest.

[cobalt1999]

24. Disagree.

Hillary and Obama do not have to win Iowa. They have the organization and money to survive no matter the results of Iowa. Edwards needs Iowa but could survive a 2nd place finish in Iowa as long as he also got a 2nd in the other early states. A third place in Iowa would end Edwards campaign, not so Hillary or Obama.

[Perky]

41. Disagree....it's the expectation thing

The CW is that it is Hillary's to lose. To finish in third would be devestating. Those who would have been voting for her in NH would begin to look around.


an Obama win in Iowa would stand Conventional Wisdom on its head.

If Clinton Obama Edwards. (the CW) Edwards is done and it becomes a two person race)
If Clinton Edwards Obama.. All eyes on New Hampshire and get out the Popcorn because it is not hardly over.

If Obama Clinton Edwards. The Real news is Obama and what happened to the Clinton Machine and Edwards is ignored and probably stays in the race.
If Obama Edwards Clinton... HRC support evaporates

If Edwards Clinton Obama... Clinton support will sag but she HAS to recover with a win in New Hampshire
If Edwards Obama Clinton....HRC support evaporates

[DemocratSinceBirth]

47. The Candidate Is Not Going To Be The One Who Loses IA, NV, and NH

He or she will have the word "loser" tattooed on their forehead...

[zulchzulu]

25. It's going to be up to Iowa, New Hampshire, Nevada and South Carolina..

...to see where the race is going before February 5th.

If Clinton wins Iowa (she won't), it's hardly "over".

[Debi]

29. What about absentee ballots being cast in states like CA/NY?

those votes will be banked before the first four contests are completed. And those two states combined eqaul over six hundred delegates - 4x all four early states combined.

[cobalt1999]

38. will those absentee ballots be counted and the results made public that early?

In Florida, absentee ballots are not counted until after the election.

[Debi]

45. Right - they wouldn't be counted until after the election, but they'd be cast before

some of the early states held their contest. Some voters don't stay faithful to their candidate and leap like lemmings after the first couple of contests. If a ballot was already cast it couldn't be taken back. So a candidate could perform poorly but have votes already banked through an organized absentee ballot program (it would be expensive and labor intensive - so I'm betting only a high dollar candidate could afford to do it - right now we have three of them).

[zulchzulu]

44. Based on how absentee ballots worked in 2004... who knows...

It certainly is an interesting component to the primary race.

According to an article I saw, "California, Illinois, New Jersey, Oklahoma, and Utah" are states with absentee ballots. From what I can see, New York is not on the list.

Still, the media will be pushing out the message of what happens in the first four states leading up to February 5th. That's when the absentee ballots supposedly will be counted.

http://www.essentialestrogen.com/2007/05/millions_poised_to_cast_vote_b.html

[Debi]

48. I agree that the media will be non-stop about who comes out in the top three

in all four early states. I just think that an orgainzed (and well funded) campaign will work to get votes banked prior to (or while) those contests are occuring.

Thanks for correcting me on New York :hi:

[zulchzulu]

50. Whoops...

The article I cited was incorrect. You CAN use an absentee ballot for the 2008 primary, but the deadline was August 27, 2007.

http://www.lwvnyc.org/election.html

Now that makes me wonder what the deadlines for other states. It appears California keeps previous absentee ballot voters on file for the next election.

[slick8790]

31. Mostly agree.

I don't think hillary is toast after a second or third finish, but it is a huge blow. Without an extremely close second, i'd say it's almost and even playing field. Edwards needs a win, or another very close second to have a chance of pulling out the nomination. But if it turns out to be a big Hillary win, despite polling suggesting otherwise right now, i think it might as well be over.