Edwards

I will admit to not having heard the details — just the report on XM’s POTUS ‘08 channel that Edwards will be announcing his withdrawal from the race this afternoon.

Given that he’s been the third wheel of the Clinton-Obama party since New Hampshire, it’s not terribly surprising.  However, I’m going to be interested in seeing to whom Edwards voters go.  I’d bet that this will help Obama more than Hillary, but that’s just a guess on my part.

Seen at CNN, the South Carolina Dem primary results:

With 86% of the precincts in:

• Obama — 229,775 (54%)
• Clinton — 114,636 (27%)
• Edwards — 79,538 (19%)
• Kucinich — 462 (0%)

So, presumably, this is it for Edwards?

Seen at Reliable Politics:

Congressman Duncan Hunter of California has dropped out of the presidential race.

He was still in?!

What I really want to know, especially after Saturday’s abysmal performance by Edwards in Nevada, is how long will Edwards still be running?

My money is now on his hanging through to South Carolina….but not much further, barring a miracle there.

Oh, and congrats to Ron Paul for finishing in second place (albeit a distant second place) in Nevada.

Seen in the Detroit News:

Top Michigan Democrats made another plea Wednesday to coax supporters of presidential candidates Barack Obama and John Edwards to vote “uncommitted” in Tuesday’s Michigan primary, rather than staying home or crossing over to vote in the Republican contest.

Obama, Edwards, and Bill Richardson yanked their names off the ballot here, leaving New York Sen. Hillary Clinton as the only leading contender for Democratic voters.

U.S. Sen. Carl Levin and state Democratic Party Chair Mark Brewer said Michigan Dems can still have an indirect say in the nominating process if they check the “uncommitted” box on the ballot. State law prohibits write-ins for candidates who have not authorized write-in campaigns; Obama, Edwards and Richardson have not.

If “uncommitted” draws at least 15 percent of the vote in a congressional district, delegates not bound to any candidate could be sent to the national convention, possibly enabling Obama and Edwards supporters to play a role in the nomination.

Again, this weirdness is a result of the DNC’s edict that states holding unsanctioned primaries before the 5 February starting line would see their delegations stripped of their votes…as well as agreement among the major candidates to boycott the state.

So, unless something happens, Hillary stands to win by a landslide in Michigan, receiving no delegates for the showing.

The story above would seem to be the Michigan Dems saying, “Come out and vote anyway.  You don’t have to vote for Clinton.  Here’s how….”

So, tomorrow is the Iowa caucus, and as might be expected, folks are making their final predictions.

The most interesting of these, I think, are Robert Novak’s, who’s expecting:

• On the GOP side: Romney first, Huckabee second, Thompson third, McCain fourth, and Ron Paul fifth
   
• …however there’s potential for quite a bit of volatility among the number 3, 4, and 5 positions.  (”Ron Paul could make a splash, as well. He’s in fifth place in most polls, but his supporters are unmatched in enthusiasm and dedication. A third-place finish for Paul is not out of the question.”)
   
• Among the Dems: Obama first, Edwards second, Clinton third, and Richardson fourth-but-irrelevant.
   
• Expect Obama and Edwards to benefit the most from Iowa’s 15% viability rule, since Clinton is rarely anyone’s second choice.  (You apparently love Hillary or hate her.  Edwards appears to be the most popular choice among supporters for the also-rans.)
   
• Novak also mentions the possibility that the rest of the Democratic field could drop out, perhaps even before New Hampshire next week.

  (Personally, I’d think that Richardson, Dodd, and Biden would hold on in the off chance of a miracle in New Hampshire, but it’s likely that they’ll admit non-viability very soon now.  Kucinich and Gravel I’d think would hang on, out of nuttiness and orneriness respectively.)

While Hillary certainly may have done a reasonable attempt at sounding well-thought-out when answering debate questions earlier this week, it certainly leaves her open to having snippets of her statements mixed and matched in unfortunate ways.

Although I don’t like Edwards, he’s got an effective ad here:

Some comments as I listen in to tonight’s debate:

Read the rest of this page →