View Story | 73 comments
Comments: Expand Shrink Hide (Always) | Indented Flat (Always)
But Obama is too close and too big in organization to be running as someone's VP at this point. And Edwards said he won't run as VP again. I think a lot of people would be really happy to see that alliance, certainly a lot of DK people. But I think the likelyhood of it is very slim. Sadly, I think if one of the two doesn't get knocked out really early, like Iowa early, Hillary will benefit from the diluted opposition and skate to the nomination.
McCain is not getting my state. Is he getting yours?
by Sun dog on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 05:19:28 PM PDT
is that a two person race is harder on Clinton than a three person race would be.
If Edwards wins Iowa, Clinton wins the nomination on Feb 5.
If Obama wins, then we have a two-way race for the nomination on Feb 5
John W. McCain, Bush's third term.
by aaraujo on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 05:26:45 PM PDT
[ Parent ]
Mine is that if Edwards wins Iowa, he can sweep the early primaries, and dominate on Feb 5th.
Goos luck to your candidate.
Rick 08 Preference - Obama -9.63 -6.92Fox News - We Distort, You Deride
by rick on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 06:06:32 PM PDT
That's definitely how I see it. I think Obama maybe still has a shot if he's second behind Edwards but the likelyhood of a Clinton nomination goes way up if Obama doesn't win in Iowa.
by Sun dog on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 06:15:42 PM PDT
A loss in Iowa shreds her front runner status, inevitability, and her "I'm a leader who can win" schtick. And if she looses Iowa, look for the backstabbing to start between her supporters, as Kos pointed out earlier today.
by Uberbah on Fri Dec 14, 2007 at 06:27:10 PM PDT
wide narrow
View Story | 73 comments