With the pivotal Iowa caucuses just 11 days away, one thing is clear: anything, and I do mean anything, could happen. So here are a few possible scenarios that could shape the outcome of this Democratic nomination process.
One scenario is that Hillary Clinton wins the Iowa caucus. If she does that, then I would bet everything I have that she will be the nominee. Iowa is Hillary's big hurdle and the biggest obstacle in her inevitability at becoming the nominee. Hillary started out this year behind Edwards in Iowa, but by mid-July she began topping the Iowa polls. She maintained her lead, although not a huge one, until November, when Barack Obama began pulling ahead. Now, just a little over a week to go, Clinton is creeping up on Obama's lead. In fact, Real Clear Politics has averaged the last 6 polls from Iowa, and the result is a literal tie between Clinton and Obama.
But just because Edwards isn't tied for the coveted first place spot in Iowa polls, he is, as Newsweek put it, the wild card in this caucus. The reason for this is that Edwards has the most support among traditional caucus goers and hence his support is the most solid of the top 3. Edwards is also the leading choice among caucus-goers when asked who their second choice is. If I had to pick right now who had the best shot at winning Iowa, I would have to say Edwards. Clinton has strong support, as does Obama, but both are counting a great deal on first time caucus goers, especially Obama.
I'll go out on a limb here and say that Obama may actually perform the worst out of the top 3 in Iowa. Why? As I mentioned in a previous article (available here), Obama's support comes mainly from younger voters, the group that is historically the least likely to actually show up on caucus night. Obama might have the momentum in Iowa right now, but the question that we'll have to wait to have answered is whether his supporters actually get out and take part in the grueling caucus process. In short: Obama may be 2008's Howard Dean.
Going back to Edwards, the sad thing about him is that he could win Iowa by a large margin and still lose every other primary/caucus. Unlike Clinton and Obama, Edwards is lacking in the financial resources to take his campaign through Super Tuesday. Indeed, an Edwards' win in Iowa could all but guarantee that Clinton will be the nominee.
So while this race is as unpredictable as ever, I will say with rather certainty that if Clinton finishes ahead of Obama in Iowa, then she will be the nominee. On the other hand, if Obama finishes better than Clinton in Iowa, he will most likely be the nominee. Sadly for him, Edwards has no real shot at being the nominee, although he has an excellent shot at winning Iowa.
5 comments :
One of the things that has crossed my mind about the Iowa caucus is that the top three vote getters may be so close, that the New Hampshire vote may have to stand on its own. If that happens I believe that would be good as I think voters should not use what happened in one state to influence the vote in another state.
I believe WAY too much emphasis is placed on Iowa and New Hampshire. Iowa is one of the most conservative states and trying to win the Iowa caucuses forces candidates on both sides to push way too far to the right. The larger states of New York, California, Michigan, etc. are much more liberal but have their influence pretty much squashed by the early Iowa caucus. I believe that there should be a campaign season for the entire country which would culminate in one large nationwide primary for delegates, with each party having their convention weeks later. hat would give the entire country a voice in selecting the candidate instead of just a few, small early caucus or primary states.
Why Iowa?
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20071228_the_path_to_a_national_popular_vote/
http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20071228_
the_path_to_a_national_popular_vote/
Paste entire link together for article.
"I believe WAY too much emphasis is placed on Iowa and New Hampshire. Iowa is one of the most conservative states and trying to win the Iowa caucuses forces candidates on both sides to push way too far to the right. The larger states of New York, California, Michigan, etc. are much more liberal but have their influence pretty much squashed by the early Iowa caucus. I believe that there should be a campaign season for the entire country which would culminate in one large nationwide primary for delegates, with each party having their convention weeks later. hat would give the entire country a voice in selecting the candidate instead of just a few, small early caucus or primary states."
I completely agree with that. Why Iowa and New Hampshire? They are arguably two of the least diverse places in the U.S. A national primary would probably serve the country better.
Post a Comment