More Politics
Some more analysis on where things stand:
John Kerry has to be considered the front-runner, after winning convincingly in both Iowa and New Hampshire. However, it seems to me he's a sort of accidental front-runner, and that his tenure in that position may turn out to be as stormy as Dean's. The main issue this week will be whether he starts to come under attack and how he handles it. There's also the money aspect - I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that he doesn't have the resources to compete in all seven February 3 states, which opens the door for others. However, if he gets a huge bounce in the polls, that may not matter. Still, I feel there is a chapter in this campaign which has yet to be written, and probably several. (Granted that despite liking him on paper, I could never quite get on board an relished finally getting a defendible excuse to remove him from consideration, so I might be reading my own attitude into the general public.)
John Edwards has said he needs to win South Carolina, and he probably will. He might also be competitive in Missouri, Delaware, and Oklahoma. After that, it depends on his further fundraising, what happens if Kerry comes under attack, and what happens with Clark, with whom he seems to be splitting the southern/moderate vote.
The wisdom that says Edwards is the most likely "anti-Kerry" ignores Oklahoma. Wesley Clark should and must win here to remain a viable candidate, and if he does, I don't see how the media can give all their attention to Edwards for winning his southern neighbor. (Oklahoma, of course, borders Arkansas, but I have trouble seeing Oklahoma as a cultural neighbor of anything but Texas, and Clark hasn't built a reputation in Arkansas politics.) In addition, he should be competitive almost everywhere, simply because he has organization and fundraising on almost Deanish levels. (We're getting Clark ads here in Wisconsin three weeks before the primary.) Considering Edwards has to push hard in South Carolina at the expense of other states, Clark could easily be the big surprise of the day.
What to make of Howard Dean? I was amused to see just now that Dean's New Hampshire finish got its own postive yahoo headline. Dean has the money and organization to come back with, but the problem is he has to get more positive press to create momentum. If he finishes at least second in the majority of February 3 states, I think he looks good for the weekend states of Maine, Washington, and Michigan, especially if Kerry gets knocked around. But it's hard for a one-time front-runner to climb back to the top, and that's what he's trying to do.
Joe Lieberman, you did not finish in a three-way tie for third. But thank you for playing.
Bottom Line: Last summer many thought we'd see a nothern competition and a southern one before getting the final two candidates, and we may be back to that model. And the southern primary is just beginning.
John Kerry has to be considered the front-runner, after winning convincingly in both Iowa and New Hampshire. However, it seems to me he's a sort of accidental front-runner, and that his tenure in that position may turn out to be as stormy as Dean's. The main issue this week will be whether he starts to come under attack and how he handles it. There's also the money aspect - I'm pretty sure I read somewhere that he doesn't have the resources to compete in all seven February 3 states, which opens the door for others. However, if he gets a huge bounce in the polls, that may not matter. Still, I feel there is a chapter in this campaign which has yet to be written, and probably several. (Granted that despite liking him on paper, I could never quite get on board an relished finally getting a defendible excuse to remove him from consideration, so I might be reading my own attitude into the general public.)
John Edwards has said he needs to win South Carolina, and he probably will. He might also be competitive in Missouri, Delaware, and Oklahoma. After that, it depends on his further fundraising, what happens if Kerry comes under attack, and what happens with Clark, with whom he seems to be splitting the southern/moderate vote.
The wisdom that says Edwards is the most likely "anti-Kerry" ignores Oklahoma. Wesley Clark should and must win here to remain a viable candidate, and if he does, I don't see how the media can give all their attention to Edwards for winning his southern neighbor. (Oklahoma, of course, borders Arkansas, but I have trouble seeing Oklahoma as a cultural neighbor of anything but Texas, and Clark hasn't built a reputation in Arkansas politics.) In addition, he should be competitive almost everywhere, simply because he has organization and fundraising on almost Deanish levels. (We're getting Clark ads here in Wisconsin three weeks before the primary.) Considering Edwards has to push hard in South Carolina at the expense of other states, Clark could easily be the big surprise of the day.
What to make of Howard Dean? I was amused to see just now that Dean's New Hampshire finish got its own postive yahoo headline. Dean has the money and organization to come back with, but the problem is he has to get more positive press to create momentum. If he finishes at least second in the majority of February 3 states, I think he looks good for the weekend states of Maine, Washington, and Michigan, especially if Kerry gets knocked around. But it's hard for a one-time front-runner to climb back to the top, and that's what he's trying to do.
Joe Lieberman, you did not finish in a three-way tie for third. But thank you for playing.
Bottom Line: Last summer many thought we'd see a nothern competition and a southern one before getting the final two candidates, and we may be back to that model. And the southern primary is just beginning.
posted by Brian Ulrich at
12:49 AM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
Subscribe to Post Comments [Atom]
<< Home