Further, the talk of Clinton being the Nominee is premature and a wishful thinking on your part.

Bowers is most certainly not a hillary backer. He's just honest. Hillary is in front at the moment

And you are right that things may change a lot they. But don't forget they also may not change at all. And even if they change they're just as likely to change in HRC's favor as in Obama's. Hillary is in a very good position at the moment.

And if you're of the opinion "that polls that are not relevant today." dismissing somebody one those polls is rather strange, Either they mean something and HRC is running strong in first place, or they don't matter and Edwards is quite relevant. You can't have it both ways.

I must disagree with you.  Any way you look at the polls right now, if the election were held today, Clinton would be the nominee.  And this is coming from someone who will not vote for Hillary in the primary.  The good news for Obama and Edwards is we are still about 7 months away from the Iowa caucus.

I don't think you can dismiss Edwards at this point.  I know another diary from on on week or so ago looked into the historical bounce one gets in New Hampshire after winning Iowa and it was around 14 points.  If Edwards wins Iowa and that is not even ironclad at this point, the historical bounce in New Hampshire would put his numbers at about 30%.  This would pass Obama and come very close to Clinton.  Now it will also matter how close everyone is in Iowa.  If Edwards wins and Obama narrowly loses to him and Clinton comes in on on distant third, that could be devasting to Clinton's poll numbers because both Edwards and Obama would gain significantly at the expense of Clinton.  That being said Clinton would not be out of it by any stretch of the imagination.

Of course if Edwards finishes on on distant second or third, he is in serious trouble with the present poll numbers the way they are.  The big thing for Clinton and Obama in Iowa is just not to finish distant third or of course fourth.  Obviously, with these present poll numbers Hillary would be hurt the most by finishing third because she is the frontrunner now.  Where Obama would be hurt by finishing third is that he would not be seen as the serious challenger to Clinton.

has there been a poll without Edwards - Where does his support go? Most likely Obama, but that is a guess.  If Edwards flames out that closes the Clinton-Obama gap.

Edwards will flame out and "not be a problem" in Iowa?

I don't think so.

If anything, Obama and Hillary supporters should be worried about whether Richardson can place second here. He'd have to raise his game as a campaigner and hope that no scandals came out in the national media, but I certainly would not rule out a second-place finish by Richardson in Iowa.

A good indication how strong her lead is that in your story everybody will have to score upsets simply to level the playing field. Clinton can survive a Edwards win in Nevada, Clinton can survive an Obama win in South Carolina, While both Edwards and Obama desperatly need those simply to make it anybody's ballgame.

A lot can happen the comming months, and your scenerios are indeed plausable. But they do show that both Obama and Edwards are fighting an uphill battle. And while in presidental elections uphill battles are certainly not lost before hand it's not going to be easy for both of them.

The two most recent NH polls showing Hillary substantially in the lead in that state both included independents in the polling data.

These independents are voters who voted in huge numbers for McCain in 2000.  They may also just decide to vote for Fred Thompson if he gets into the race on the Republican side.

The biggest upset listed above is Clinton recieving union help to win Nevada.  I can see the CTW bunch deciding to sit out the primary, lest they piss off the Clinton juggernaut.  I can see them turning people out for Edwards.  But actively campaigning for Clinton in the primary?  Come on...

I think NV comes between Iowa and NH, doesn't it? If Edwards takes Iowa, Hillary does poorly and he's got the mo' and union endorsements in NV and he takes that as well that gives him a lot of mo' heading into NH and then he just has to be a close second in SC and he's sitting pretty.

Hillary or Edwards (or any other candidate for that matter) or an ally should be able to spin Obama winning SC. "Historically half the people voting in the democratic primary in SC are african-american, this year Obama, an african-american, is seen as a top contender nationally. Obviously that's going to increase turn-out amongst african-americans in the primary perhaps to the level of 60% or 70% of the voters in the democratic primary this year. Frankly, Obama has to win SC and the real battle is for second and third."

It's that simple and it's that true. If the media broadcasts that it makes obvious sense and if Edwards, Hillary, or anyone else manages to win SC after that it will destroy Obama and boost them massively.

about 3 to 5 million or so. But she had a bigger senatorial campaign warchest then Obama that she transfered. So it's probably correct.

Kerry led at that time I believe. But the general name recognition was a lot lower, there were a lot more people still undecided and not paying attention, etc. This iosn't going to be a replay of 2004, the conditions are quite different. Who know what will happen?

Exactly.  We also need to remember that Edwards has already been campaigning in front of the New Hampshire voters in 2004 (when he came in fourth to Clark's third).  I don't see such a bounce from a win in Iowa occurring in 2008 because Edwards is not such a new name as he was in 2004.

According to Chris's avg above Edwards leads Clinton by 5 pts and Clinton leads Obama BY 3 PTS.

These are all very close numbers. I bet the AVG for un-decided's is in double digits.

Because that would most likely show her winning everywhere else. Bowers is picturing an exciting race for the nomination, whereas if Clinton places a close second in Iowa and wins clearly in NH she'd be hard to catch and if she wins both the first two primaries she's likely uncatchable.

Iowa is her weakest point, if she comes in first or close second, there simply isn't much of a scenario left.

The only tension left in the race would be when and who she chooses for VP.

For some reason, people in NH don't seem to get this point. Iowans are very aware of it. Usually when I am talking with people about the candidates, they raise the issue of Hillary having baggage or being too polarizing even before I mention it (in some cases before I even say that I am for Edwards).

Just today I was talking with a professional woman, about 40, who used to live in NY and should be right in the Hillary demographic. But she commutes from a smaller town about an hour from Des Moines (the town she grew up in), and she knows that Hillary would never fly as a general election candidate.