Edwards wins Wisconsin

[© Tweed the Younger]

I was thinking about this last night.  Wondered what everyone though about it.

We all were big John Edwards supporters back in January and February.  He's since fallen out of favor, because he's kind of an empty suit, but still, he's a nice-looking guy and a smooth talker with a southern smile, both attributes that won Bill Clinton 2 terms (although Edwards is probably 1/3 as smart as Clinton)

Anyway...

Edwards did better than expected in the 02/17/04 Wisconsin primary, yet fell about 6% short to Kerry.  My question to everyone is...suppose Edwards was able to win Wisconsin, taking 40% to Kerry's 35%.  How does the rest of the nominating season play out?  I'd imagine Kerry still wins, but it's more competitive and maybe Edwards wins Ohio, Georgia, and Maryland on Super Tuesday.

Thoughts?

[True Democrat]

On Super Tuesday, Edwards makes it slightly closer, winning Georgia, maybe, maybe Ohio.  Kerry goes on to win the nomination, but loses the popular vote by 5% instead of 3%.

[True Federalist]

Feb. 24  Edwards manages to get enough votes in Hawaii to swing the state from Kerry to Kucinich.  He also picks up a couple more delegates in Idaho and Utah.

Mar 2. Edwards wins the primaries in Georgia and Ohio and the caucus in Minnesota and gains delegates across the board as Kerry only manages pluralities in California, Connecticut, Maryland, and  New York.

Mar 9.  Edwards wins Texas, Missisippi, and Louisiana.  It begins to look like a divided convention is a possibility.  Network news anchors salivate as the possibility no longer seems as remote as it once was.  The superdelagates consider who would make the better candidate.

What then?  Edwards has a chance, but even with this most optimistic of scenarios I won't out and out say he wins the nomination.

There will be no John John ticket.  With the race lasting longer Kerry won't select Edwards and Edwards won't select Kerry, no matter who gets it.  Kerry probably picks a moderate democratic Governor from a swing state while Edwards probably goes with either Clark or Lieberman.

Kerry probably does about the same if he wins, while Edwards does better and at the least helps the Democrats win one or two close Senate races that they lost in reality,

[jokerman]

Edwards would have done pretty well in the general election.  I know most complain because he didn't deliver North Carolina, but that's just Kerry's fault.  I've seen a lot of polls showing Edwards would have been succesful.

What kills me is how the hell the conventional wisdom came up with "Kerry is the electable candidate."  Just about all of the candidates would have done better than Kerry.  Maybe only the three non-serious candidates, Kucinich, Braun, and Sharpton, plus Dean could have done worse.

[Beef]

What kills me is how the hell the conventional wisdom came up with "Kerry is the electable candidate."

That's what I was yelling, kicking, and screaming about back in Feb. 2004, but no one listened to me .

[© Tweed the Younger]

What kills me is how the hell the conventional wisdom came up with "Kerry is the electable candidate."

That's what I was yelling, kicking, and screaming about back in Feb. 2004, but no one listened to me .

Me too.  The Democrats here are 100000000000x smarter than those who control the nominating process.