"Edwards team... is the class of the field." (NY Mag "Escape From Iowa") LINK

[Blackhatjack]

A very insightful article that lays out the dynamics of the Iowa Caucuses and the strategies being pursued by the top Democratic Candidates. There is so much detail here that is not being covered by the MSM you need to read the entire article at the link provided below.

Edwards is a force in Iowa, and the other campaigns know it. Some of the excerpts are provided here in compliance with copyright restrictions.

http://nymag.com/news/politics/powergrid/40989/index2.html

NY Magazine Article "Escape From Iowa"

Excerpts:

"Equally clear is that Edwards’s anti-Clinton tack is neither desperate nor impetuous. All along, there has never been much doubt that the time for serrated-edge contrast would come this fall. Or that Clinton would be the Democrat who would feel the blade. Everything that is happening now is part of a thoroughly calculated plan, long in gestation."

<snip>

"...the Edwards approach has its logic. Roughly 120,000 voters participated in the caucuses in 2004, and the savviest operatives in all three campaigns assume that something like half of likely caucusgoers are still undecided. (That public polls put the percentage at between 10 and 15 percent is dismissed as yet another sign of those polls’ notorious unreliability when it comes to Iowa.) For the Edwards campaign, the first crucial task in the next month and a half is to raise the stakes of the election in the eyes of those 60,000 undecided voters, to convince them that fundamental change is necessary, that not just any Democrat will do in 2008."

<snip>

"Methinks they doth protest too much. Indeed, the fact that Plouffe and Fischer are posturing this way suggests that the Obama forces continue to fear the prospect of being trumped by Edwards in Iowa. And with good reason. So far Obama has spent some $5 million on advertising in the state, and Clinton’s total is more than $3 million, whereas as of two weeks ago, Edwards had spent just $20,000. And yet the race remains a statistical three-way dead heat."

<snip>

"More to the point, because of the bizarro nature of the caucuses—the participants must go out, on a frigid night, for a multi-hour ordeal of public declarations of support and multiple rounds of voting—the contest in Iowa is a slog-it-out ground war, in which organization and get-out-the-vote efforts are paramount. And here all sides concede privately that Edwards’s team, which has been in place essentially for five years, is the class of the field. When I ask Edwards if he’s concerned about signs of slippage in Iowa, he literally laughs in my face. “We have 99 county chairs and about 75 percent of the precincts covered with precinct chairs,” he says. “I know how to run a caucus campaign in Iowa—and so do the people who work for me.”

MORE

[VoteJohn04_com]

1. Finally!

Great piece! People keep downplaying Edwards and his campaign and come caucus night they are going to be left in awe when Edwards yet again blows away the pre-caucus polling numbers.

Iowa IS Edwards Country.

[Blackhatjack]

2. The Edwards Campaign is executing a very smart, powerful strategy in Iowa...

I have said for some time that Edwards has the strongest ground force in Iowa, and that his supporters are the most likely to actually caucus.

Add to that the union endorsements that provide for thousands of individuals who will definitely show up to caucus and vote for Edwards.

THe whole 'angry Edwards' meme did not just appear out of thin air. It is an attempt to peel away support that other campaigns see in their own internal polling in Iowa.

The more the MSM depicts Edwards as losing support in Iowa, the greater the attention Edwards' win there will be.

[mzmolly]

9. Yep, If he comes from behind in the polls to win Iowa, he will be THE talk of the MSM.

:hi:

[Blackhatjack]

12. It would put the MSM in a box ... 'we were right but he surged ahead', or 'he was ahead all along'..

The MSM would have to admit that they were totally wrong for years about Edwards if they chose Plan B. IF they choose Plan A, it provides them with cover even though they knew what they were peddling was not accurate.

[mzmolly]

13. They wouldn't admit to being wrong. They would simply deem him the anti-Hillary

and, we'd have a race on our hands.

[1932]

29. The MSM is certainly working on the distraction story in case he does win. Just like the Dean Scream

was the distraction story in '04.

[BrklynLiberal]

3. Nothing is gives one an advantage as much being underestimated by those around you.

Edwards has my vote...

[Blackhatjack]

30. Many underestimated Edwards in the courtroom to their regret....

He is not only smart. He is perserverant and will hang in there until he wins.

[Botany]

4. Skill, Talent, and Class = Edwards & Company

The Edwards express is coming and I expect to see tons of more
anti Edwards postings here and nasty stories about him in the media.

Haircut
Big House
Sleaze Ball Lawyer
He is a flip flopper
Edwards really is not a real democrat
He is getting money that we can't be sure of where it came from
If you support Edwards your are sexist
If you support Edwards you want more right wingers on the Supreme Court
Hillary is putting more people in Iowa
Can you really trust Edwards?
He is a pretty boy

[Cha]

23. But, nothing of

substance! Attacking the messenger.

[CorpGovActivist]

5. Now That Is a Nuts-and-Bolts...

... article that sure scratches an itch.

Thanks for providing the link for us.

- Dave

[Blackhatjack]

7. Campaigns do not talk much about 'internal polling', but you can bet....

ALL 3 Campaigns have done extensive internal polling in Iowa, and continue to do so, and the numbers being reported nationally about what is going on in Iowa are not matching up with the closely held internal polling numbers.

Why would we draw that conclusion?

One way to infer that there are significant differences between publicly released results and internal polling results is to look at the respective expenditures of campaign funds.

It is a given that all 3 top tier Democrats 'have to compete in Iowa.' So it is safe to assume that none of the 3 are willing to take a 2nd or 3rd place showing in stride to get to N.H. or Nevada or S.C. where they might do better.

Look at the expenditures for campaign ads by Clinton and Obama in Iowa in the millions of dollars. Obviously Edwards cannot afford to lose there either, so why has Edwards held off spending on campaign ads there until the last two weeks? It might have something to do with building momentum. Or It might have something to do with their own internal polling showing that they are ahead.

The only thing better than an Edwards win in Iowa is the appearance of a surging Edwards win in Iowa, which might have more carryover to the next primary states.

[CorpGovActivist]

8. Internal Polling...

... done right, can conserve resources for deployment at the right moment, I agree.

Much to my surprise, I find myself taking a good hard second look at Edwards these past couple of weeks.

There are still quite a few things I think he could/should be doing, that don't require much of an outlay of time or money.

Out of curiosity, who do you think is on his short list for Veep if he secures the nomination?

- Dave

[Blackhatjack]

11. The one name I have heard mentioned is Sen Webb of Virginia....

... however, the Edwards strategists have not mentioned anyone publicly or even among campaign leaders.

While I believe Edwards can 'flip' Virigina without putting a VA hometown boy on the ticket as VP, I think Webb does a lot for firming up the Independent/Unaffiliated voter concerns over Edwards' perceived lack of foreign policy experience.

That is the one reason I would be conflicted over Obama in that slot. Not that Obama would not pull in votes and do a great job, because I think he would. But from a strategic point of view, if Obama is not in the General I think Edwards wins over his followers anyway.

Biden could ably fulfill that function but he has a disqualifying black mark by his name when it comes to running in the General Election. He withdrew a former run for President over a plagarized speech, and did not fight it out. He also has a history of making some inappropriate statements. Even so I think he would do a fine job if elected.

I don't see any other Dem Presidential Candidate presently running fulfilling that spot.

Although highly unlikely, a good choice would be Sen Russ Feingold.

Clark would be a long shot IMHO, but a possible.

Bayh of Indiana has too many bad votes on his record, and would not match up with Edwards.

BUT HERE WOULD BE THE KILLER TICKET: AL GORE as VP. Gore gets the Office of VP to concentrate his power to publicize and actually DO SOMETHING about Global Warming. How popular would that ticket be? LOL <Not very likely I am afraid>

[CorpGovActivist]

14. Of Those Names...

1. Obama: Sounds like you've had the same thought - if those two team up early, they can pool resources. I wonder how they've gotten along behind the scenes on the campaign trail? The big and obvious drawback here is that Obama has even less national and international experience than Edwards himself.

2. Webb: There'd be a backlash in VA if he were to accept, I think. Virginia is flippable without him on the ticket, though he'll be a tremendous help to the ticket at campaign stops here.

3. Bayh: Besides the vote mismatches, we'd never hear the end of hair product stories with Edwards/Bayh. One upside: he's been a governor.

4. Biden: I know a lot of people talk about him as Veep, or as SecState. Frankly, I'd like to see him offered Defense. He's too mouthy for State, but might be a surprise good fit at Defense.

5. Feingold: Eh. I'd have to be sold on that.

6. Gore: Yikes, did someone spike your grits this morning? Gore serving as Veep to Edwards?

7. Clark: Intriguing.

8. Sitting governors: Do any make your list on reflection?

Thanks for sharing your insights. The gut-check grapple I keep doing with Edwards is: the length of experience. If he could see his way clear to picking someone who has a longer "traditional" public service resume, I'd feel those misgivings ease a little bit, perhaps.

- Dave

[Blackhatjack]

17. Response ....

It is all about putting together a coalition of electoral votes to get you over the hump.

Even so, I have tried to eliminate Webb on numerous grounds, but he just seems a good fit with Edwards in reaching that goal. Please convince me otherwise if you can.

The Clark alignment with Hillary surprised me, and lowers the likelihood that Edwards would select him.

I did not say before, there is a -100% chance Edwards would pick Hillary Clinton.

AS to sitting governors, IF Edwards did not hail from North Carolina there are two possible governors who might have filled the bill. Not a chance this time.

I don't know enough about the other governors, but I don't think Ted STrickland is a possiblity either(even though he is in the critical state of Ohio).

Help me out if you have a governmor prospect to consider.

[CorpGovActivist]

19. Using Webb Wisely

I think that whoever the nominee is, s/he should use Webb wisely. This means:

1. Give him a prominent slot at the convention, to speak about the war in Iraq from a personal perspective.

2. Campaign with him extensively in Virginia.

3. Invite him to battleground states with large military family populations.

But I hesitate at having him on the ticket this early into his elected public service.

Clark still intrigues me, though that's the extent of it.

I assume you meant to say that there is a 100% chance Edwards would NOT pick Clinton?

Recent polling in OH seemed to show that the Buckeye State doesn't see Strickland as Veep timber yet; probably better to just use him wisely too.

Honestly, I'm drawing a complete blank on other governors who are seasoned enough to fit the bill. Mark Warner of Virginia would still make a great choice, in my book, but I think it's clear he intends to clinch the safe Senate seat instead. I'm sure there's at least one governor I'm overlooking, but coming up snake's eyes so far.

- Dave

[Blackhatjack]

20. Once again we are on the same page....

I agree with all your comments.

I might add that Mark Warner seems to me to be a shoe in for the VA Senate seat, and that is why I did not mention him. But I do like him a lot.

If you look at the present crop of Governors, a traditional source of qualified running mates, I don't see anyone jumping out there either.

And yes, Hillary would be an absolute NO as far as Edwards is concerned. (Can you imagine the campaign ads that would be run against them by Repubs if she was the VP?)

Looking deeper into the House and Senate I find many people I like, but who are unlikely to register with voter's on the name recognition scale, and none of them bring a long history of public service or experience.

Edwards may just have to go with the 'young Kennedy-styled ticket.' Make the case that it will take outsiders to 'shake the place up' who have not yet been influenced to protect the system in Washington. A young ticket v. Repub Ticket could be a winner if they establish hope of change as the basis of their campaign.

I am at a loss right now, and the Edwards camp is being very tight lipped about who might even make the list of those considered. Although I have heard non-Edwards campaign Dems mention Webb's name.

[CorpGovActivist]

32. At Least the Nominee Won't Face...

... the brokered convention prospect that JFK did.

LBJ wasn't exactly in his salad days or an outsider.

; )

- Dave

[Blackhatjack]

33. I think Edwards is going to need an 'outsider' rather than long time Congress Member, but....

I think Edwards would almost have to bring in an 'outsider' rather than run with a long time member of Congress.

Clark could fit in here.

I have another possibility in mind that I don't want to put out publicly just yet. Check your inbox.

[CorpGovActivist]

35. Wow

I'll be watching the body language on that one a lot more carefully.

I remain intrigued by Clark; soon, I plan to sit down and do a 535 by 50 scrub. There's someone obvious I'm missing, I just know it. The only way to put the nagging doubt to rest is to go through line by line.

- Dave

[Beaverhausen]

6. thanks for posting this!

I have no doubt Edwards will win Iowa!

[LSK]

10. K&R

[frogmarch]

15. Great article!

Thanks for the excerpts and the link. :thumbsup:

K&R

[weeve]

16. You think THIS is good ...

Just wait until John Edwards announces Al Gore as his VP running mate !!

Call me crazy ( so crazy that I just started another thread on the topic ) ... but it's the perfect solution all around. Eight years of Edwards followed by eight years of Gore ( who will spend the first administration concentrating solely on the Environmental Crisis ). Sure it doesn't quite add up to the twenty straight years of Bush/Clinton/Bush .. but hey, it's a start.

Watch closely the upcoming NH Environemtal debate which Gore will chair. Expect the announcement soon after.
Hey, a boy can dream, can't he?

On edit : ha Blackhatjack ... I guess I should've read this entire thread before posting. I bow to your wiser and quicker intuition. Great minds think alike and all. The idea just popped into my mind about an hour ago, as I was just entering/exiting a short nap. You know ... that magical half-conscious state where great ideas/solutions come to a person !?! Something's in the air, and I guess our finely tuned antennae picked it up !!

[Blackhatjack]

18. I would sign off on it in a second! (But very unlikely I am afraid)...

But if Gore really wants to do something about global warming/climate change, there could be no better candidate to be associated with than Edwards. They have so many similarities on the environment positions.

Gore can continue travelling the world over promoting the message of change on his own, or he could travel the world over as the United States Vice President promoting the message AND having direct imput into the decisions that will make a difference in US policy.

It would be enticing, but a come down for someone who actually won the Presidency once before and had it taken away.

[surfermaw]

21. Glad to see I am not the o nly one thinking Edwards is n#1 in Iowa

[Blackhatjack]

22. These national telephone polls outside of Iowa are not very helpful...

Edwards is in good shape in Iowa, and the other Candidates know this.

[Laelth]

24. Several comments ...

OP. Excellent thread, thanks. It was very informative.

I also appreciated the insightful dialog between yourself and CorpGovActivist. Thanks to both of you for that.

I still consider Edwards/Obama my dream ticket. While I understand the concern about a perceived lack of foreign affairs experience among the two, I do not share that concern. * has so tarnished this great nation's reputation and standing in the world, that I believe most Americans will assume that even a neophyte could do better. For the first time in my sentient political life, I sense the Repukes do not have the stronger hand in foreign affairs. *'s handling of foreign affairs is one of his greatest failures as a President. For once, I think we're safe not covering this base in our choice of nominees.

:dem:

-Laelth


Edit--Laelth: clarity/word choice.

[Blackhatjack]

25. Here is my take...

Obama is not a bad choice because of inexperience on 'foreign policy.' However, Obama does not have alot of experience in that role, just like Edwards. Although Edwards did travel extensively in Europe and other countries over the last 4 years meeting world leaders and officials --so he has a lot more knowledge and experience than he did in 2004.

My comments were directed mainly at balancing the ticket for maximum electoral impact. I did not mean for my comments to be a slam on Obama.

However, here is the rub .... IF Rudy Giuliani is the Repub nominee, it will 911 and foreign policy all the time during the General Election.

If Romney is the Repub Nominee, different story.

I still don't see a winning candidate on the Repub side, and their nominee may not be decided until their Convention is held.

[Blackhatjack]

26. This article pretty much undercuts the ABC/WaPo Poll Results released today. n/t

[jsamuel]

27. interesting thread

thanks for posting

[Blackhatjack]

28. I think the analysis of Clinton finishing 2nd or 3rd is intriguing... I am inclined to agree ...

Hillary has really benefitted from having both Edwards and Obama in the race. Take either one out and the race tightens up dramatically.

So if Hillary were to finish 3rd rather than 2nd in Iowa it might indeed work to her benefit in later primaries, since a 2nd place finish might eliminate one or the other.

[asdjrocky]

31. This is so insightful,

I got to meet a lot of these people last weekend. They are amazing workers! And they all believe John Edwards will be the next president.

[Blackhatjack]

34. The candidate winning Iowa traditionally has momentum heading to New Hampshire...

Edwards would fit right in that mold if he wins Iowa.

And Edwards would find herself in an unfamiliar position of having to campaign from a position of weakness.

Wonder how the MSM would play that one?

[Kansas Wyatt]

36. Edwards is the only hope for the middle and lower classes of this country.

He's right.... The next Democratic President can't just negotiate and play ball with Corporate America and the Wealthy Elite. The next Democratic President must shove them out of dominating our government and beat them down to represent 'We The People.'