A possible endorsement from Al Gore.

As an Edwards supporter, I think he pretty much has to win in Iowa, although a close 2nd, AHEAD of Clinton might give him a shot at New Hampshire. If he wins in Iowa; LOOK OUT! We could have Howard Dean without the “yearrrghhh!” and that just might take off, as a real populist wave. Which I would be delighted to see. :o)

Clinton has enough beltway support and money that she can survive an Iowa loss to either Edwards or Obama as somewhat damaged goods, but if she then loses in New Hampshire, it will be bye-bye Hillary; no way can she recoup in South Carolina. If she’s lost in Iowa and N.H., S.C. will make it a threefer, and put paid to her campaign hopes, as her money and her support start to dry up. None of these candidate can hang on long after three losses in a row.
Another factor working against Hillary; the longer the primaries go on, the tougher it is for her. Bush’s little deal of paying 70,000 Sunni insurgents $300 each, per month, is nothing but a stopgap, and I don’t think the Shiites will let them into the security forces as formal militiak nor will they tolerate CentCom arming and paying all of their former nemeses for the next year. Sadr and Hakim could make a real truce, and with the brits down to 2500 in Basra, the Shiites could shut off the oil taps to those fields in the south and invite CentCom to come down and try to turn them on again. And wouldn’t that be interesting in the middle of “surge accomplished”?

Who knows what it’s going to be like in two or three months? Pakistan could explode, and if the wheels start coming off again, Clinton’s the one who will suffer the most from being so close to bush’s fuckups.

Obama is tougher to call. He could lose in Iowa, and then win in New Hampshire, and he’ll be in good shape headed into S.C., where there are a ton of black voters waiting for him. If he wins all three, it will be tough for Clinton, or Edwards, whose candidacy right now is perceived as the most fragile, to slow his “mo”.

I don’t even care what happens with the republican dwarves. If we nominate either Edwards or Obama, they will be reduced to sacrificial goats.

Duh, I couldn’t see the link, my bad.

Raven, I usually can’t see them unless they’re at least 3 words long and at least one is mixed case. Glad to hear I’m not alone.

This has to be a bit strange for the candidates who have given a lot of speeches (many of which were their one standard stump speech) in a lot of small towns around Iowa and New Hampshire. Now they have to earn votes from people who mostly know who they are (background and general political position).

Well, there certainly isn’t much time to fight the opponents as happened months ago. Whatever is said and countered might not reverberate across the states. And, in the heat of these last frantic days any craziness or mistake could seem overwhelming.

I’d suggest just sticking to the tried and true: look good, listen closely to the people, speak clearly and tell them from your heart just what you can do for them.

Of course, there are already riffs built into their speeches to highlight differences between themselves and the other candidates. That’s fine, just don’t go crazy over trivial things which may pop up between now and caucus day. It isn’t worth the effort to hit new things and it’s riskier than just sticking to the text.

After the assassination of Mme. Bhutto there were several strange things said and it just shows that reacting in this environment can quickly be seen as over-reacting.

Huckabee’s “apology” to Pakistan was odd.

Richardson’s call for a focus on Afghanistan seemed tangential and contrived.

Hillary’s confession that she had talked with Bhutto seemed like crass name-dropping at the worst moment.

Obama has been sort of off the rails for a week or two already. He’s thrashing about like a drowning man.

Edwards has been pretty steady and his call to Musharraf seemed okay. Maybe it’s this decent ‘pressure’ performance which is earning him a little boost here near the end. I hope it continues.

John Edwards for President — Leadership for America!

But no, I wouldn’t wish working with those slime on anyone. The Supremes are about, if a read my tea leaves correctly about to go into eclipse and JRE and a revitalized Congress start taking care of business.

None.

Two words: Randy Moss

Go Herd!

He’s a terrific athlete.

thanks for letting me know what had you worried…

Her comments on Juan Cole’s “Informed Comment”..(Selise, I know you know that stuff, but others reading may not) :)

(Biden said something similar)

Me shorter: I worry about the vulnerabilities of our candidates.