Ok. Want to know how Edwards's momentum continues to rise?

For the last few months or so, it's always been about Obama and Hillary. Now the voters are quite tired of both of them, and wants something fresh.

First and foremost, I think we can all admit that the top 3 are all DLC's one way or another (I think Edwards quit DLC a few years ago, which is significant to my next point)

As you know DLC is always been pro-corporatist, pro-business. There is no question about it - we've put up with a lot of pro-DLC candidates, such as Bill Clinton and John Kerry - the founding member of DLC was Clinton and Gore, but since the DLC has turned extremely right-wing even for Democrats, I think many of them quit, and Kerry was put up as a sacrificial goat to keep the Chimp Machine running.

Now, in my opinion, as an undecided, but leaning towards Edwards (my primary is not until Feb 5th), I feel that he has spoken for the people, took his time touring all over the country, resonates with a lot of people. He may not be Howard Dean of 2008, but next to Kucinich (which has zero chance), he's pretty progressive to me.

Now, Edwards finished 2nd in the caucuses yesterday, after trailing VERY badly in the polls leading up to Iowa, this is a very impressive showing, and I think the mo' will continue to rise, while Hillary and Obama continues to throw knives at each other, and Edwards just 'supporting' the knives that are being thrown, and showing that he is the true alternate and unimpended candidate of choice.

Therefore, in New Hampshire, I predict an Edwards victory, with Obama finishing 2nd, and Hillary dropping to 3rd once again. Hillary drops out and refuses to endorse anyone, making it a wide open race between Obama and Edwards, with SC (Edward's big turf area) next after NH - a big mo' will decimate Obama and finish him off by Super Tuesday.

We'll see how the debates go - the voters will be listening more closely.

Hawkeye-X

Send him money, and love, and good vibes.....(mostly money, I'd reckon).

Some of the news people should be fired for keep the lid on some candidates while pushing for ones they wanted to win. Please don't let reporters, anchors and republicans pick our candidate.. Let the primaries pick the candidate. This ball game just started.

I think a strong second keeps him going pretty good.

There is NO WAY Hillary drops out after a 3rd in NH. With all that cash? NO WAY.

Then Edwards wins SC...hmmm.

If you think about it, I think maybe Edwards was the only one of the three to really zero in on some specific things he would do as president. The other two dealt in generalities, as they don't want to tip their hands yet. Hillary might have some plans with specifics, which she could move up now to save something. It could be something people want to hear, which would put pressure on Obama. This is when mistakes are made in campaigns, or big gains are made. Edwards doesn't have much time to get the mo going in NH, and he doesn't have that lobby money the others have for TV. I think he'll try to be in top form for the debate tomorrow(?), and maybe get a big ride on that. But I do agree that he has his message getting across, and the 'Big' business people would really be upset if he pulls it out!

This is the stupidest piece of idiocy I have seen in a long time. Edwards was a DLC member for the entire time he was in the Senate. He has a pretty conservative Senator for a Democrat - very hawkish, an LCV score on environmental issues around 60, versus Kerry's of 96. Kerry, though a Senator of some seniority, was never in the DLC leadership and his relationship with them was always tenuous. On charts that were on DU, showing the votes of Senators, where there was an indicator of DLC or not - Kerry was clearly the left most member indicated and his votes were not in line with the rest of the DLC.

Kerry worked as hard as he could for at least 2 years trying to become President - putting himself back out on the campaign within a month of major surgery. When the 2004 race was down to just Kerry and Edwards, it was apparent that Edwards looked like he did not belong on the same debate stage as Kerry. Kerry's wealth of knowledge, insight and accomplishments stood in contrast to Edwards' background as a trial lawyer. Even on Edwards' signature issue, poverty, Kerry has done more and with things like Youthbuild has a record of more than 20 years of active support. Edwards was not even politically active enough to always vote 20 years ago. He even claims not to remember if he voted for Nixon or McGovern - in a time frame where Kerry was on Nixon's enemies list for bravely fighting to change the policy in Vietnam.

Kerry gave Edwards the visibility that gave him the visibility he now uses. As a VP, he was lackluster. By his own account, he refused to use the campaign's slogan "help is on the way". Even if he were right that his lame "hope is on the way" was better, it was better for the campaign to be consistent on this and he was NUMBER 2. He also did a mediocre job in the VP debate. I know you are disappointed with this turn in the 2008 race, but it doesn't help Edwards to trash Kerry. It just looks pathetic.

Kerry is a liberal lion, and Edwards is a johny come lately in comparison. Actually, there is no comparison.

I can't believe I'm reading this the day after Obama beats Hillary and Edwards in every category, including woman and union households.

Iowa has made Obama the anti-Hillary candidate. NH should be an easy victory for him.

but I hope you are correct. Like one of the posters said, "Edwards is the right person at the right time." I couldn't agree more!! I hope and I think that the race is still wide open and after I post this message I am going right to Edwards' website to make another contribution.

He put all his eggs in the Iowa basket. He doesn't have a chance of winning NH. Maybe if there was more time between IA and NH, though I doubt it.

Obama has momentum. Edwards and Clinton don't. NH is 4 days away.

You're dreaming.