I just read geekesque's diary on why Edwards couldn't possibly beat Clinton. I think he's aware of that, and he's following a strategy that doesn't rely on beating her. I would suggest that Edward's goal is, and has always been, to be a strongly influential VP instead.
There are quite a few reasons for that - they'll become clear if we look at the reasons he can't beat Clinton, and why these weaknesses turn into strength if he's aiming for the VP spot instead.
Of course, the first question is, why would Edwards do that? If you look back to the beginning of the race, it was already pretty clear that Clinton would enter the field. After his meteoric rise, Obama was also a pretty good bet. So Edwards was positioned against a huge name, with corporate backing, and the new golden child of the democratic party.
Running as a presidential contender, especially after being defeated in '04, must have been a long shot at this point already. So let's assume Edwards is politically smart enough to know that - what is his option? To position himself as a strong contender for the VP slot.
Let's look at the things that prevent him from getting the #1 slot, as offered by geekesque:
- Money
It was always clear that Clinton would have way more corporate backing (and hence, probably way more money) than all the other contenders. So, maybe, as Markos has written, opting for the matching funds is indeed "one of the stupidest decisions [...] in modern Presidential politics". Or maybe it is simply a smart play to position himself as the one candidate that's not bought and paid for.
- February 5
That certainly wasn't predictable at the beginning of the campaign, but it seems like blowing his entire budget on Feb. 5th and then closing shop is a reasonable strategy for the VP slot. He'll most certainly be #3, if he's really lucky even scratching #2. Sounds like a good place to be if you want the VP slot.
- Lack of Appeal to African-Americans
Yes, he lacks there. He's very much getting the white vote in the south, though. Edwards would be an ideal complement to Obama, and, to a lesser extent, to Clinton too.
- He's a distant third in non-Iowa states.
That means he's positioned outside the shrapnel of the bickering between the two top candidates. He's the one who can afford to avoid dirt-slinging and cheap attacks, because they won't get him the #1 slot anyways. That, in all likelihood, means that there's bad blood between #1 and #2 after the early primaries, when it's time to look for a VP - you can see where this is going...
My bet is that he'll end up being the VP candidate on the democratic ticket, and that that has been at least a big part of his strategy from the very beginning. Think of it - he's taken quite a few "unpopular" positions (especially for moderates), which will allow him to reel in the left, while the front runner can focus on the centrists. And since he's rather young, being VP for 8 years is going to only increase his chances when he finally runs for president.
Suddenly what he's doing sounds like a pretty clever strategy, doesn't it?