If Edwards loses Iowa is he finished as a candidate?

[book_worm]

I heard one local commentator say this (I live in neigboring Wisconsin) and his reason being--"people in Iowa know John Edwards and gave him a leg up there in 2004 and for most of this year he was the front runner, so a loss for Edwards would be interpeted as a set back and won't give him the momentum he needs going into NH and SC."

I think this makes some sense, but it's a shame so many people will take the verdict of one state and run with it.

[liberal N proud]

1. Depends on how bad he loses

If he comes in second or a very close third, there would be no reason to stop after one caucus

[jpgray]

3. Yep

[NightWatcher]

2. when do the other candidates start to fall out of the race?

not edwards, per se, but the people who start to pull less than 20%.

[LSparkle]

4. If people see the latest poll -- just shown on MSNBC -- I hope not

He's the only candidate who can beat ALL FOUR RETHUG FRONTRUNNERS ... If the Dems are serious about taking back the White House, they ought to give Edwards a second look. (Sidebar: "You really ought to give Iowa a try ... " from "The Music Man" just popped into my head.)

[chelsea0011]

5. Why let Iowa pick the candidate? Let the full primaries choose.

And eff NH too.

[Mike03]

6. I hope it's not like that, because if Iowa can completely determine the

outcome of the primary season, something would seem to be very wrong.

But I don't know; I'll wait to see what others more knowledgeable than I am have to say. That would be massively depressing, IMO.

[Nutmegger]

7. I think Iowa is make or break for Edwards

He needs Iowa to put him in a very good position for New Hampshire and Super Duper Tuesday. He's running against a massive amount of money, most importantly. A win in Iowa would shift the focus over to him and hopefully some campaign donations. He is organized in Iowa, and I believe that will pay off in the end and not money.

Barring some unforeseen incident, I don't see how he can sustain without Iowa.

Edwards 2008!

[On the Road]

8. Not if He Succeeds Expectations

A lot depends on how the media plays it. If he's still portrayed as an also-ran, a second- or even a strong third-place finish could give him a boost. Neither Clinton nor Obama are shoo-ins at this point -- they both have vulnerabilities and voters are still deciding. No reason there cannot be a Democratic Huckabee.

[karynnj]

14. He is portrayed as the one who has lived in Iowa

and is credited with "having done well in Iowa last time" - he is this year's Gephardt if he loses.

Also, the Carolinas, Iowa and WI were his best states in 2004. If he loses Iowa and SC (he is polling third and if you assume he lost one of the others won - so it is very likely he loses SC too), why would he be seen as a winner.

[On the Road]

24. I Agree, That is the Consensus of Politically Knowledgeable People

but it is not necessarily what will be communicated by the talking heads and news organizations.

It is a matter of momentum and the perception of momentum. Edwards's marginalization in the news so far has hurt him in the polls, but will help him create a perception that he is exceeding expectations.

For example, in 2004 Dean was often seen as having an advantage in NH because of his governorship in neighboring VT. However, Kerry was from neighboring MA and probably was even more of a favorite son since something like 30% of all NH residents formerly lived in MA at some point.

A weak third would be a critical blow to Edwards, but anything above that will be determined by presentation and public reaction.

[RiverStone]

9. He must win in at least (1 of the following): Iowa, NH, or SC and...

...come in a strong second in another.

IMO, that is what needs to happen to give him real momentum.

And ya know what? That's exactly what I predict will happen! :hi:

[Tejanocrat]

10. So long as he beats Hillary, he's fine. If Hillary wins, she runs the table. If Obama wins and

Hillary comes second, it's a two-candidate race from there on out.

Either of these scenarios is fatal to the campaigns of Edwards, Kucinich, Richardson, Biden, and Dodd.

[tekisui]

11. That seems right, in my mind.

It should be exciting, at any rate.

[shadowknows69]

13. Exciting like being in a car wrecck exciting

My heart can't take it. Hurry up Iowa.

[tekisui]

15. 23 days...........

[karynnj]

12. Probably

He is not expected to do well in NH and is currently polling behind HRC and Obama in SC. Also if Edwards doesn't win - someone else will. That person will get momentum into the other states. It's hard to see how afer campaigning almost non stop since 2003, he can suddenly gain support.

[riverdeep]

16. I hope not.

Of the three frontrunners, he's the only one who is practically guaranteed to be able to beat the field of pubs. With Obama or Clinton, it's much more of a gamble. Hillary would barely win, if she will at all, and her ability to lead would be challenged throughout her term. Obama, I don't like saying this, but there are people who hate the thought of a black man 'leading' them. He still has less liabilities than Hillary in the public's mind, though.

The media is all but ignoring Edwards right now. I'm not sure if this is good or bad.

[DFW]

17. Edwards is a Democrat

Any time the big media focuses on a Democrat, it is to demolish him/her.

If the media were objective, they would be saying, look, an Ayatollah in a tie
is actually selling enough snake oil in Iowa to have a chance to win the caucuses!
But no, Huckster is riding high on the right and Hillobama is getting torn to shreds
the second one of them looks poised for a win. I'd think Edwards is thinking no PR is
good PR, especially in Iowa and NH, where the groundwork is at least as important as CNN,
hopefully more so.

[riverdeep]

23. Yeah, stealth, baby.

It's kind of what happened with Huckabee. He seemed to come out of nowhere, to them. The media has this nice narrative all ready to go, and these people just won't cooperate!

[Blackhatjack]

18. I saw an interview with an Iowan regarding the big 3 candidates JRE, HRC and BO...

The out of town reporter was reciting the pitch the Obama Campaign made that he had been in Iowa the longest and had the largest organization on the ground there.

She stopped him with a laugh, and then she said "John Edwards has been here 6 years...."

She didn't need to say anything else.

Edwards is following a very carefully crafted strategic plan, and he knows more about how the Iowa Caucuses work than any of the other candidates.

He will be fine in Iowa....

[panader0]

19. No way. Do Iowans represent all of us?

No candidate is out until the nomination. Sure the odds change, but so what.

[Blackhatjack]

21. Only Iowans vote in the Iowa Caucuses....n/t

[Yukari Yakumo]

20. Absolutely yes.

Currently Edwards is a distant 3rd in almost every state except IA and NC. Not only does he need to win, he needs to win decisively. (I would say by 7% or more.)

Without a decisive win, there is no way he could get the momentum (or the money) to be remotely competitive in NH, NV, SC, or beyond.

[Blackhatjack]

22. The 'distant 3rd' designation is a MSM myth... All legitimate pollsters call it a tie

... but really Edwards is much stronger than these supposed telephone polls by national polling groups calling from out of state.

Edwards will win Iowa.