Hmm. I didn't know his dad was a mill worker. He should bring that up more often.

Joking aside, I like the guy (I like all our candidates). I doubt he'll finish first--not sure about the rest.

What I want more than anything out of Iowa is for the media not to rush to crown the winner as the surefire nominee too quickly. All this attention and importance focused on roughly 150,000 eventual caucusgoers (as well as the relatively small New Hampshire electorate) is ridiculous. Those two states have seven House members between them, and aren't demographically representative of America in so many ways. Hopefully the Feb. 5 primaries will take place in an environment where the front runner hasn't been already decided by the press attention given to the early winners.

P.S. I also want to mention that I've posted a fairly lengthy reply to everyone who commented in my diary ("An Open Request To Obama Supporters"). I figure that I shouldn't make my reply another diary, so will let anyone who might care know this way.

Here's a link:

http://www.mydd.com/story/2007/12/3/2332 50/376

That is an awful ad. "We might be the first generation to fail" is the only line that stuck with me. It is an utterly depressing thought in what otherwise appears to be a commercial trying to emphasize hope.

I would love to see Edwards succeed, but with ads like that i can see why people don't latch on to him.

for the general election. Meaning that there is little doubts about his electability. Clinton & Obama have electability doubts clouding around them. Undecideds are probably going to break his way, Biden, Richardson. And the undecideds are quite high. His second choice numbers & favorability numbers are also great.

I believe John Edwards will win the Iowa caucuses based on his strength in rural Iowa, his favorable position vis a vis second choices, and the feeling that the Clinton/Obama war will escalate much further in the next week or two.

I'm not sure you will see a similar effect compare to the one in 2004 when Iowans got tired of Dean and ghepart attacking each other ad here's why.

Agood portion of Iowans have ruled out Edwards for some reason or another and if i was to take a guess , my answer would be that many just sees him as an old face which in turn hurts him as "not the change candidate".

What helped Edwards in 2004 was that he was a  pollite fresh guy , but he's no longer seen that way.

I also think that Obama and Hillary has solid support in Iowa just like many polls seems to suggest...The des moines register and ARG clearly states that Obama and Hillary support is stronger then Edwards.

Obama and Edwards will definately bring new caucus goers into the fold...This is a guarantee and the way Edwards wins is to have as less people pparticipating in the caucus.

Hillary will bring in new women into the fold and Obama will definnately bring in new 17-29 yer old people..This is a group he completly dominates both Hillary and Edwards.

In 2004 , about 120-140k attented the Iowa caucus , but i strongly think there'll be in increase of +30k-40k....When you have the first potential black and woman president running , there's no way you could make an argument this wont bring in new people.

Obama and Hillary's popularity triples the popularity of Dean and ghepart..More people are tuning in...During the JJ dinner ,we say an increase of a few thousands....Democrats are extremely energized.

I frankly wouldnt be surprised if we get about 200k caucus goers on january 3rd because this is one of the most exciting Iowa caucus in decades where thw rest  is extremely close and will go to the wire...A lot of Iowans wont want to miss it and not be part of history.

It is the dynamic of an open field in both parties that creates the flux in Iowa.

Although Obama has made up quickly, it is hard to see him passing the longer entrenched Edwards ground organization.

There is less to indicate Clinton has the established GOTC needed. Ironically, Weather will be more of a factor in larger cities.

I agree there will be record turn-out regardless.

The wild card remains second choice. I actually like this option.

I think there is an outside chance that Edwards will finish first. Second is much more likely.

I don't see an Obama crash and burn occurring over the next 30 days. He is squeaky clean and his campaign is methodical.

Although the media narrative says that the two front runners are locked into a bitter battle, Obama isn't all that engaged. I think this is a test for him to see how he handles the heat--it tells us what kind of a campaigner will he be in the general. His grace under fire and refusal to attack back but rather defend with facts, smiles, and disbelief is a pretty good strategy for the moment.

And by a bigger margin than most think.

Hillary second.  Obama third.

Brilliant ad. The boomer generation is feeling economically unsecure, and Edwards speaks to that in a direct, honest way. Its classic Edwards. Barack still avoids the issue, and while Clinton does talk about it, her credibility is hurt.

Iowa got burned by Kerry; that's causing Clinton trouble more than anything. "We already picked a supposedly electable centrist, flip-flopper before". Right now Iowan are dating Barack, but come caucus day, they will propose to Edwards.

And most importantly, Edwards is still the best organized on the ground. He's been to every county in the state, and has precinct leaders in nearly every one of the them.  In any election, whether its county council or a presidential caucus, person-to-person networks and hands on campaigning by the candidate makes the difference. And on that front Edwards has them beat.

Edwards will come first.  

The other night on the Lehrer Report on PBS a woman from the Des Moines Register made a very pointed remark - Iowans had NEVER elected a woman to any congressional, senate, or governor post.  She was not asked the question - it was part of her presentation on the caucus. Obviously she thought that history would hurt Clinton in Iowa.

Edwards will take first simply because neither Clinton or Obama can afford to let the other finish first. Remember: none of the campaigns has run a negative attack tv ad yet. And 50% of the caucus electorate admit to having no fixed preference right now. Especially with Edwards' advantage as the leading a second choice favorite, as Obama and Clinton chip away at each other's support, Edwards is likely to be the beneficiary.

I've been posting comments here for 6 weeks saying the national media, and those who read it, are wrong to say Edwards had been running a negative campaign against Clinton; that was Clinton spin and belied by his actual speeches, ads and mailings in early states. The ads he's now running, which are being described as a "step back" from his attacks on Clinton, are largely out-takes from his stump speech -- lines he's been delivering for months, the same lines that were considered "attacks" by the Clinton campaign.

In the meantime, Clinton has made herself close to ridiculous with the attack on Obama's kindergarten homework. All that work, for weeks, to depict Edwards as "angry" and "negative" now gone. Edwards having done nothing differently, is now considered "above the fray."

A woman I know who is very active in Hillary's campaign in Iowa thinks that if the Des Moines Register poll is accurate, then Edwards will win. The internals and second-choice numbers are very good for Edwards.

I hope Edwards takes first in a big way.  I'm afraid the Republicans still have a lock on a lot of electronic voting machines and will be able throw smoke on differences between pre-polls, exit polls, and the count on the basis of an unstated anti-woman/anti-black secret ballot.  I believe that is why Edwards is being ignored by the SCLM and the Republican attack machine.  They want him to go away because he is electable.

Obama already has changed gears, and is now pursuing a two-track strategy for responding
to Clinton's attacks.

On Monday, the Obama campaign set up its new Hillary Attacks rapid-response site, which --
along with the Fact Check site it launched nearly a month ago -- can aggressively counter and
correct her remarks.

But on the same day -- two days ago -- Obama himself already was presenting an above-the-fray
persona, which served to reinforce Clinton's desperation. In response to a reporter who tried repeatedly
to engage him on Clinton's comments, Obama refused to take the bait, saying only that

It's silly season. I understand she's been quoting my kindergarten teacher in Indonesia.

but otherwise waving off both the reporter and the comments with a silent smirk that said:
"Give me a break. I'm running for President, here."

The video of this moment is embedded in this Morning Joe segment. The Obama clip
runs from 4:55 to 5:30. Also notice the follow-up comment from Scarborough's co-host,
which runs from 6:40 to 7:05.

Priceless.