Iowa is the end of the line for either Obama or Edwards

Edwards is in a tight second place in the latest Iowa polling data.

IOWA: HILLARY 25%; EDWARDS 23%; OBAMA 22%

Handicapping this, if Edwards succeeds in pulling off an upset in Iowa, or finishes a tight second, it gives him major mojo going into NH and SC. If Edwards stumbles in Iowa and finishes third, he's finished.

Obama also has to make a stand in IA. If he wins, or squeaks in at second, he stays alive. If he's third, his campaign loses all steam.

Clinton can afford to lose IA, even though it will dent her momentum, simply because she's so far ahead in NH.

My bet right now is that Edwards is the one who does FAR better than expected.

An Edwards/Clinton race offers far more contrast for the Democratic primary voter than an Obama/Clinton race, as Clinton and Obama have taken very similar policy positions, even if they appeal to different demographics.

Edwards v Clinton will offer a choice of a hard hitting populist vs. a smart, but much less ideological pragmatist. We could do a lot worse.

If Edwards makes this a race, and somehow pulls it out, I'll have some faith restored in the process.

If I were a betting man though, I'd let it ALL ride on that Not happening though.

So can Edwards.

Dean's rally cry, which the media jumped all over, and the Democratic leadership let go unanswered, was the main reason Kerry trampled Dean.

Hillary is NOT HOWARD DEAN. She's being given the throne, and she's not going to mess up.

They'll all stay in until one of the Super Tuesdays. Dodd, Biden, Richardson, (snif) Kucinich--most of them will be gone.

doing what he did last time and sticking it out until the convention. It gives him a platform to let people know it does not have to be like this. I don't know if he has said as much this time but he did last time and he stuck it out.

I should have made an exception for the Kooch.

As may a strong fourth. :shrug:

February, obviously, will be the clincher.

Hard to get a sense of what's on the ground. I prefer either of them to Hillary, but I have a gut sense that Obama may be gaining more ground. That could shift, though; I still can't understand why he blew off the AARP debate. That was not a smart thing to do, given the caucus-goer demographic (feel free to bash AARP; that's not my point).

Anyway, get the popcorn.

I can't take another 4 years of Republican rule, and I have started considering emigrating to another country.

I do think that Hillary would be vulnerable in NH if either Edwards or Obama won Iowa. I remember 04, when Kerry came from almost nowhere to win Iowa and he was an instant inevitable going into NH.

One of the disadvantages of the Hillary is Inevitable thing is that if she actually loses the first primary, the whole thing disappears. She is demonstrably NOT inevitable. Instantly, many who thought she was will give a second look to the winner of Iowa.

Don't bet huge sums of money that Clinton won't be hurt seriously if Edwards or Obama wins Iowa, especially if by a significant margin.

I do agree, however, that unless Clinton comes in a distant third in Iowa...which is possible....then either Obama or Edwards will be hurt.

This is the time that is exciting. I can see lots of things happening.

We. Shall. See.

every time I hear that Iowa is make or break for Obama or Edwards it annoys the crap out of me! Don't the other states get a say? This kind of thinking is basically saying if Clinton wins Iowa the other states might as well cancel their primaries. This process of letting Iowa pick our nominee is foolish and outdated.

Over the past 30 or so years, there have been 13 contested Iowa caucuses, eight who won Iowa went on to get the nomination, but only two - Jimmy Carter and George W. Bush - went on to win the White House.

So, explain the value to me...

I've never met anyone from NH who says they're waiting for the result of the Iowa caucus to make up their minds on who to support.