Edwards will likely push us to a brokered convention scenario

Go see the charts and graphs in this DailyKos diary by Man from Middletown

John Edwards decides 2008 on the DNC floor
by ManfromMiddletown

Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 11:01:34 AM PST

Due to the frontloading of the 2008 primary season, we are rapidly approaching a scenario in which Democratic nomination will not be decided until August. Let me start by explaining what superdelegates are, and why they matter. In 2008, there will be 4,040 delegates to the DNC convention in Denver, a candidate needs 2,020 in order to win. Of these 4,040 only 3,248 (80.2%) will be chosen through primaries and causes, the other 792 (19.2%) are elected Democratic Governors, US Senators, US Representatives, DNC members, and distrinquished party leaders. Looking at it another way, in order to win the nomination without the support of superdelegates, a candidate must win 62.2% of the delegates elected in primaries and caucuses in order to secure the nomination. This is a monumental task, and in an environment where we have 3 candidate who have announced their intention to stay in the race until the convention the possibility of a brokered convention looms large.

~snip~
As it stands now in the elected delegate count, Obama has 25 (37.3%), Clinton 24 (35.8%), and Edwards 18 (26.9%). Only 2% of the elected delegates have been chosen at this time, so the situation is fluid, however the February 5th primaries will provide 1,698 elected delegates (52.3%), and by that date a cumulative 2,148 elected delegates (66.1%) will have been awarded. Assuming that in the long run, Obama carries 38% of the elected delegates, Clinton 38%, and Edwards 24%, this would give the following delegate count: Obama 1,234 Clinton 1,234 Edwards 780. Again to illustrate this graphically, see the following. In order to win on a first ballot with 2,020 delegates, either Clinton or Obama would have to win more than 99% of the superdelegates.


~snip~
2008 is unique in that the fron loading of the primaries present the potential that we could go from a highly contested but winnable race on Feb 4th, to a race that's deadlocked until the convention by Feb 6th. Another twist is that Barack Obama draws much of his support from Republicans and Indepedents, so that he's likely to do better in states with open primaries (where independents and sometimes Republicans can vote) than in those with closed primaries (limiting voting to registered Democrats) where Clinton is likely to do much better. Looking to Feb 5th, the delegate heavy states of the Northest (NY, NJ, CT, MA) are closed primaries. California allows independents to vote, but has a strong Democratic registration. In short, it's likely to create a fairly even division between Clinton and Obama, with Edwards taking a strong third in many of these states.

After Feb 5th, it's likely that the delegate count will create a deadlock that means that the nomination won't be decided until August.

And to be honest, I'm all for John Edwards staying in until the election, because he has forced the party to confront issues that make the donor class uncomfortable. If John Edwards goes to Denver with the block of delegates needed to determine whether Obama or Clinton is the nominee, he can push for the party to adopt a strong platform. And while in this case John Edwards may never be President of the United States, he will be remembered as a great leader who forced te Democratic party to return to its roots on mandating universal healthcare coverage, pushing the party to adopt populist economics, and ensuring a new New Deal Majority.

link to the diary which has charts and graphs: <http://www.dailykos.com/story/2008/1/9/115957/8561/622/433655>

Stay in, Edwards!

Works for me!

"President Gore, anyone?" LOL

On edit: But seriously, this shows how necessary it is for Edwards to stay in the race. Saving up some ka-ching to send to him!

Works for me...even though Joe already said no.

I'm all for that!

He might would say not to Al too, but somehow I doubt it. :grin:

What about Hillary?

Nothing wrong with it that I can see.

Thank you for invigorating my Edwards hopes!

With the venom between Obama and Hillary maybe Edwards can emerge as the compromise? That is a tantalizing prospect but what is more likely is Edwards using his bloc of delegates to get himself the VP slot and a progressive platform.

to accept the VP slot again, but someone commented that pride, honor, and dignity go out the window when you are a presidential candidate, and I think there is a lot of truth to that. I'm still dreaming about Edwards-Biden, but realistically, Obama/Hillary-Edwards would be excellent if it kept JRE viable for eight years from now.

I think it would hurt his pride but since it would give him a great chance to win eight years from now his head should trump his heart and he would accept it. It would also give him a good opportunity to fight for change as VP. He won't be able to do nearly as much outside of politics. The only chance he has at the vice presidency is to stay in and barter his delegates for it. He won't get it again any other way.

not JOIN it.
Hillary/Edwards or Obama/Edwards is NOT likely.


"There are forces within the Democratic Party who want us to sound like kinder, gentler Republicans. I want us to compete for that great mass of voters that want a party that will stand up for working Americans, family farmers, and people who haven't felt the benefits of the economic upturn."---Paul Wellstone

K&R

maybe I will have to stick it out for Edwards afterall ...

Gore. Damn!!

:party: ;)

there's almost no chance of a brokered convention.

beating Hillary in NH.

which appears likely, he won't be in past Feb. 5th.

And I don't get the notion that the third-place finisher would become the nominee.

to hang your hopes on.

on Edwards winning Oklahoma?

Clark won Oklahoma. Didn't make a difference.

I concede it won't make a big difference but it will at least prevent the "you haven't won a primary so you should quit." meme from developing in the press. My hopeful scenario for Super Tuesday is Edwards wins Oklahoma and pulls out a surprise win in one or two other places, maybe Alabama or another southern state. Since there are so many states on Super Tuesday a candidate can enhance his/her chances a lot in a given state by targeting it. In addition to this hopefully he has a few strong second places too.

Clark's win kept him alive. Oklahoma should do the same, with some good results elsewhere coming on Super Tuesday, for Edwards.

on Feb. 5th, he's done.

He needs to win Oklahoma and back it up with one or two more wins. Missouri, New Mexico (where he was a scant five points behind Hillary and one point behind Obama in the latest poll), Colorado (the only non-ARG poll had him tied with Obama and only six behind Hillary), Kansas (Edwards six behind Hill, one behind Obama), Massachusetts (Edwards ahead of Obama by one and thirteen behind Hillary), and Tennessee (tied with obama and 15 behind Hill) are possibilities.

Looking at those states Massachusetts and Tennessee are reaches. He was behind by double digits and those states are important enough that Obama and Clinton should pour considerable resources into them. In the other states he is only five or six points behind the leader and with targeting and good campaigning he can win some. The ideal scenario for Edwards would be winning Oklahoma, Missouri, New Mexico, Colorado, Tennessee (hoping the southern things puts him over the top) and Obama winning a similar number of states. That would give Clinton about a dozen wins, including New York and California and pressure (under the ideal scenario) Obama to quit. Obama quits under party pressure and Edwards has momentum as someone who the media ignored got a couple of surprise wins and he has a chance to go up against Hillary.

Concededly this is unlikely but it is possible that Edwards will win states on Super Tuesday and is why he should continue.

that Edwards would drop out before he even received any of his matching funds? 'cause they might not come to him till March. If he dropped out they might just not ever come to him (?)


Anyway, I believe him when he says he'll stay in it. The only way he would drop out IMO is if he cut a back door deal with Obama, kept VERY quiet, that he would be the VP on Obama's ticket if he won the nomination.

It doesn't matter what reality is, they will alway think there is some way for their candidate to become president.
In Decemeber 2008, they will still be saying that there is a chance.

First of all, it is completely unlikely that Edwards will get 24% of the vote. Where do you see him gettin it?I've reviewed all 24 of the Tsunami Tuesday states and the big and medium size ones are not favorable to JE. It's far more likely that he'll end up with under 20%. It's also more likely that the electorate will break for either Hillary or Obama and there won't be a brokered convention. If there is, odds are that the body playing kingmaker will be the SD's and that would really suck.

This is a very unlikely scenario, and I'm glad it is. A brokered convention produces a divided party and a battered and weakened nominee.

The OP's entire case is predicated on Hillary and Obama getting exactly the same percentage of the vote. Possible, but not probable. And JE share of the vote is likely to continue decreasing. He got 17% in NH after coming in 2nd in Iowa. That is the likely trend.

I have seen it claimed that Edwards getting 30% in Iowa and 17% in New Hampshire is a sign of him bleeding support. Nonsense. He was always much stronger in Iowa than New Hampshire. He was level with Clinton and Obama in Iowa. In New Hampshire he was mostly in the low teens and at one point down to single digits behind even Richardson. His 17% is better than he polled in New Hampshire for most of 2007. If you told me six months ago that Edwards would get 17% in New Hampshire and there would be no leading candidate after it I would have been very happy.

Edwards may lose support if he keeps losing but even if this happens it is unlikely that he would fall out of the double digits. His support has been remarkably resilient. Despite a media blackout he is polling at 18% nationally, twelve points behind the new JFK who has over $100 million. He's never dipped into the single digits nationally. Edwards should keep his support through Super Tuesday. Nevada is not being given much attention by the media. He should finish a solid third in South Carolina, perhaps even a surprise second. In other words the status quo would continue for Edwards. Even if he is second in SC it will only give him a small bounce. Edwards will be alive and well on Super Tuesday and has an excellent chance of winning at least one primary (Oklahoma). If Edwards is going to lose support it will be after Super Tuesday if he does poorly, i.e. goes winless and averages less than 20%. That is a long time from now. It is also possible that either Obama or Clinton, more likely the former will do badly on Super Tuesday. Bad for them would be winning five or six primaries and losing the other eighteen or nineteen. Who knows what the political landscape will look like after Super Tuesday. It may be down to Edwards and Hillary (or Obama) by then. The other scenario for Edwards is that if Obama keeps losing Obamania will fade and some of that support will go to him.

Edwards strategy failed. He bet on Iowa and lost. It really was vital for him to either win there or come in a close second. He got very little momentum from his virtual tie with Clinton in Iowa. And .25% more of the vote is indeed a virtual tie.

He probably will keep getting a double digit share of the vote. He could get as high as 20% in NV and perhaps 20% in SC. It's improbable that he'll place second in SC. He has practically no AA support in a state where 50% of the dem primary voters are AA. It's just bizarrre to believe that he'll get anything more than a small percentage of that vote. If he comes in a distant third (10+ points behind 2nd place), his numbers will inevitably slide going into Super Tuesday. Why? Because fewer voters will see his chances as viable. In addition, Union support will start to peel away as it did from Dean. It's no accident that the Culinary workers didn't go with him. It's no accident that SEIU NV didn't go with him. Super delegates will start coming out fast and furious in the next 2 weeks. They'll break for Obama and Clinton in some configuration. Edwards won't get more than a few- if any. Super delegates don't back people they perceive as having no chance.

Let me also point out the pitfall of buying into the media blackout meme. Although the media has largely focused on Obama/Clinton, that holds true only for the national media. He got a boatload of coverage in both Iowa and NH- and it didn't seem to make much difference. His failure in NH cannot be pinned to the MSM.

Putting your hopes on "Obomanian" fading, is kind of sad. First of all, it's not a fad, it's clearly a movement, and it's been so for some time. Sure, he could blow it, but it's hard to see such a disciplined candidate doing that. Obama isn't Howard Dean.

I see Edwards going into Super Tuesday in a slightly weakened state after losses in NV and SC, and a win in OK isn't likely to do a thing for him.

He really doesn't have a chance unless Clinton or Obama either blow it big time with a gaffe or scandal, or drop dead.

I don't disagree that losing Iowa was a major blow to his chances. He did not get much momentum from 2nd in Iowa but some forget neither did his 2004 second in Iowa give him much momentum. His 2004 second only gave him four points in New Hampshire. It was a dominating win in South Carolina that really got him going in 2004, along with the once unstoppable Dean fizzling out.

He had been averaging 12% in Nevada but that was before Biden and Richardson left. He should at least win some delegates in Nevada now that only three candidates are left. Kucinich is still around but he isn't going to get more than one or two percent anyway. In SC it will be tough for him to get 2nd for the reason you mentioned. My scenario for him finishing 2nd there is based on Hillary's black support collapsing in SC. We'll see if this happens but one poll after Iowa had her 46 points behind Obama in the Palmetto State. If this holds then Hillary's advantage with the black vote over Edwards will be minimized and Edwards has a chance to beat her enough among the white vote to finish ahead of her. This would be a coup for Edwards given the media writing him off.

The media blackout is nationally. Despite it he is polling at 18% nationally, twelve points less than $100 million Obama who has the best press a candidate could dream of both in quantity and quality. What does this tell you? It tells me he has a very loyal base that doesn't give a flip what the media is telling it to do. I see no reason why they will abruptly abandon him over the next three weeks. If he does bad on Super Tuesday then things may change but let's not write his obituary yet. I thought Obamites would have learned from the experience of recent days...

Obamania fading is possible. There is so much hype about it that if the supposed new JFK loses NV, SC, wins only a couple of states on Super Tuesday he will be exposed as a false idol and will lose some support. Some of that will go to Edwards.

A win in OK alone won't do much. See my above reply to MonkeyFunk.

You may be right. Remember that you are a biased Obamite desperately hoping that Edwards disappears. You are at least as biased as I am. Even under the worst scenario for Edwards I think we both can agree he will still be breaking 15% on Super Tuesday. That means he will be collecting delegates. He has no reason to quit before Super Tuesday. Let's see what happens. If Obama underperforms on Super Tuesday maybe he will be pressured to quit and it will leave just Edwards and Clinton.

Edwards is unlikely to win but the only way to find out is to keep fighting. Many other candidates were declared dead early in the primaries such as Ronald Reagan, Ted Kennedy, and Jerry Brown only to catch fire late (not to mention candidates like McCain who were supposedly done just weeks ago and Hillary who was done just days ago!). Neither of these three ultimately won the nomination, although Reagan came within a hair of unseating an incumbent president, but that isn't the point. They prove that a candidate can catch fire late and given how things are going now no one is close to getting a majority of delegates. If Edwards catches fire late he may be first when the dust settles.

I posted saying the same things about Edwards. So sorry, you can't blame my take on Edwards on partisanship. And no, it's not desperation- that seems the realm of you Edwardians. You folks have a lot more to be desperate about than the supporters of either Clinton or Obama.

I am not suggesting that Edwards drop out before Super Tuesday. In fact, I've consistenly said the opposite. And actually, I firmly believe that if wants to stay in until the Convention, regardless of poor results, he should do just that. I don't subsribe to the theory that Edwards dropping out would benefit Obama. And I certainly think he owes it to his supporters to fight through Super Tuesday.

It's quite clear that you'd like to think that support for Obama in nothing but a fad, and you're hoping that it'll fade. Do you realize how unlikely this is?

Even with the economy tanking JE is not growing his base. And with losses in NV and SC, it's hard to see him doing that.

The world may change after ST.

I do believe some of Obamania is a fad. Whether it will fade in time is something only time can tell. Obama's youth support is in significant part due to the same reasons other things in pop culture are popular among this demographic. I know because I am in the 18-30 demographic. I know several Obama supporters and most of them know little about what Obama is running for or about the other candidates. Obama is just so kewl!

Guess it won't be a cakewalk, after all.

JE came in a distant third.

"It was a dominating win in South Carolina that really got him going in 2004, along with the once unstoppable Dean fizzling out. "

I'd argue Edwards never "really got going" in 2004. Yes, he hung around longer than either of Kerry's chief rivals, but despite the media hype, he never seriously challenged for the nomination in terms of racking up primary wins. His strategy then seemed to make sense - he knew the longer he stuck it out, it'd be that much harder for Kerry to give the VP nod to anyone else. But at no point after NH was Kerry ever in real danger of losing the nomination to Edwards.

Unless he's angling for another VP nod (which I think we can all agree he's not), there's no real point in him hanging around after Super Tuesday if he doesn't start picking up some wins.

A brokered convention is like putting DU on national television.

Ugly, but compelling, entertainment.

:rofl:

http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html

:wow:

Go check it out for yourselves.

I think Edwards should stay in until the convention. A brokered convention could be a good thing.

that polls 10 months out are nothing but a snapshot. Look how quickly Clinton's national lead started to fade.

And no, brokered conventions are not good for the candidate. Makes me happy that it won't happen.

that you shouldn't attack other DUers:hi:

So Who IS The Real Leader, Has Been All Along as they copy/plagiarize EVERYTHING John Says... It IS John Edwards!

WHAT IS The Matter w/ These People?

Even Hillary COPYING "THIS IS PERSONAL to Me,"and NOT Word ONE Is Mentioned About it? :wtf: !!!!!!

I cannot imagine all the superdelegates going to Hillary or Obama? They would probably split the superdelegates - that would make Edwards the kingmaker if he stays in the race.

Even small victories on certain states can lead to large discrepancies in the delegate count. Then you have the superdelegates who will face heavy pressure from insiders. It would take a virtual three way tie to cause a brokered convention, and that doesn't look probable. A two way tie with a close third won't cut it because one or the other of the top two is certain to the minimum required votes.

If either party has a brokered convention this year, it will be the Republics. I know that's what many Paul supporters are hoping for.

I'm begging Edwards to stay in the race until convention. He's probably the frontrunner that appeals to me the least, although I do like him, but I'm not ready for this to be the Hillary/Obama race after only two states.

when the votes come in.

(especially with DIEbold in the mix - it's not telling WHAT might happen!(

How many delegates would it take to nominate?

That's all his staying in the race could do.

He has run twice now and wasn't picked by the voters. Staying in until the convention would be nothing but a desperate ego trip. Honestly, I don't think he would do something so stupid.

Probably not a majority, but still, enough to make this resentment unnecessary.

I'm sure some Edwards supporters will go with Hillary, but there is no way she can win a two way race. A majority will never vote for her.

K & R

I want Black Americans and the world to see the underlying bigotry and hypocrisy that's embedded in the establishment of the Democratic Party. The more this drags on, the more that's revealed,:toast: