This race is still wide open. Here's the proof:

http://www.cbsnews.com/stories/2003/12/17/opinion/polls/main589167.shtml

Opinion poll, December 17, 2003

Dean 23%, Clark 10%, Lieberman 10%, Gephardt 6%, Sharpton 5%, Kerry 4%, Edwards 2%, Moseley-Braun 1%, Kucinich 1%

http://www.cnn.com/2004/ALLPOLITICS/01/19/elec04.prez.main/index.html

Actual Iowa results, January 19, 2004

Kerry 38%, Edwards 32%, Dean 18%, Gephardt 11%

The Dean "scream" occurred immediately afterward, and though many people seem to think the media hype of this event was what killed him, the actual fact is that he was pretty much done when he finished third in Iowa after such high expectations.

There is a lot of hype around the first woman and African-American president, that I doubt they will stagger out of the top tier like the other candidates in '04. However, I do believe Biden could get a boost for his general appeal and people placing him as their second-candidate, hopefully, placing in 3rd or 2nd.

It's obviously true that this is a different election. Since Iowa and New Hampshire have been moved up, perhaps it would be instructive to see what the polls looked like among likely Iowa caucus voters two weeks prior to that contest in 2004?

http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3827/is_200401/ai_n9350068

"Right now, Dean leads in both contests. KCCI TV conducted a poll January 5-7 of likely Iowa Democratic caucus voters (margin of error +/-5%). The results: Dean 29%; Gephardt 25%; Kerry 18%; Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) 8%; retired Gen. Wesley Clark 3%; Sen. Joe Lieberman (Conn.) 2% and Rep. Dennis Kucinich (Ohio) 2%. American Research Group polled 619 likely New Hampshire Democratic primary voters (margin of error +/-4%) January 1-3. The results: Dean 37%; Kerry 14%; Clark 14%; Lieberman 7%; Gephardt 6%; Edwards 3%; Kucinich 2%."

So with a +/- error of 5%, the WORST Dean could have been expected to do in Iowa was 24%. Gephardt 20%. The BEST Kerry could have been expected to do was 23%. Edwards 13%.

And yet the actual results were Dean 18%, Gephardt 11%, Kerry 38%, Edwards 32%.

And in this poll there appeared to be very few undecideds.

....that was four years ago! LOL

My gut feeling: Clinton's endorsement from the Des Moines Register will be forgotten but her personal negative attacks on Obama which followed the Republican playbook will not. Meanwhile Obama will also suffer because these attacks point up his vulnerability to the Republican slime machine. Edwards is the clear winner, Biden finishes stronger than expected. Edwards 32%, Obama 22%, Clinton 22%, Biden 10%, Richardson 6%, Dodd 3%, Kucinich 2%, Gravel 1%.

Even though Kerry was closer in that Iowa poll, it was still Dean 29%, Gephardt 25%, Kerry 18% and Edwards 8%. With a 5% margin of error Dean should still have edged out Kerry in the worst case scenario for him, and Edwards should have placed no higher than fourth.

Good point about national polls vs. Iowa polls however. The most recent national poll shows Clinton at 45%, Obama at 27% and Edwards at 15%; however the most recent Iowa poll is much tighter, Clinton 29%, Obama 26%, Edwards 22%.

I believe Edwards will win Iowa and probably place second in New Hampshire due to the bump he gets from Iowa. Will then win in his home state of South Carolina and become the candidate to beat.

(Current Rasmussen rankings for New Hampshire as of Dec. 12: Obama 31%, Clinton 28%, Edwards 17%.)

Clinton loses more percentage points by the time New Hampshire rolls around due to her personal negative attacks on Obama and not placing first in Iowa. Edwards gets a bump from Iowa, placing second ahead of Clinton. After he wins South Carolina in a landslide, it's his nomination to lose. Obama would need some quick victories to stay competitive but momentum will not be on his side and the weakness of his actual message and agenda will become more apparent when he is compared directly to Edwards as opposed to Clinton.

in Iowa, he'll be the winner in NH (since his support is so much stronger than Edwards' there and he'll have shown Hillary is NOT inevitable), and sweep from there. He's the one with the money to compete nationally. Not Edwards.