Any thoughts on how badly Edwards would be hurt if he were to finish behind Lieberman in NH?

I don't think this will happen, and doubt Lieberman has legs with a Democratic primary electorate that wants its nominee to be anti-Bush, period and without ambiguity. Some polls after last weeks debate, though, showed an uptick in support for Lieberman in NH, and Edwards excellent retail campaign skills give him less of an advantage the larger the electorate -- especially in states like NH where independents can vote in the Dem primary.

Not exactly fair for you not to pick a winner, Dan. Come on! Be bold!

Here's how it actually breaks down:

Kerry 38
Dean 26
Edwards 17
Clark 13
Lieberman 5

Late breakers go with Kerry, the frontrunner, who's run a mostly sharp campaign this week.

Edwards benefits from all those awesome campaign skills. The guy just rises and rises, whether slow (early this week) or fast (pre-Iowa ... and now?)

Clark just sits right about where he is in the polls.

The Lieberman vote drifts to candidates percieved as more viable.

By the way, for the true political junkie, some guy did this amazing compilation of all the tracking polls.

Here's a link:

New Hampshire Tracking Polls.

One factor that nobody mentions, but I think must be on the minds of some voters, is that both Edwards and Kerry appear to wear hairpieces. I have more on this, and a couple of links, on my site (scroll down to "More About Candidates and Hairpieces").

I like this blog much but the parenthetical, fake "editor" comments are becoming grating. Kaus does them well. Here, everytime I see one I think, "You are copying Kaus but not doing it as well." This is like going to a French restaurant and, instead of getting French bread with the meal, you get Japanese rice, done not as well as at the sushi joint on the corner. ('Does that make any sense?' -- Ed. No, but it lets me write this parenthetical comment to show how lame they are. 'Clever, but if the metaphor had worked it would've been better.' True.)

Check out today's Washington Post article on who Republican strategists think is their toughest potential opponent.

Any guesses, before you look?

“If Edwards makes a credible showing in New Hampshire, he'll be able to attract sufficient strength in the South to stay in the race for a while. “

One should place a lot of emphasis on the “awhile” part. I don’t see John Edwards doing much after that. Also, what about Al “race card” Sharpton? He should make life interesting in the South. Will Sharpton win? No, but he will force the other Democrat candidates to make fool of themselves.

If I'm right, however, then the Kerry balloon could pop, and the current Senator from Massachusetts will start to resemble... a former Senator from Massachusetts (Paul Tsongas).

This scenario represents where the smart money in Las Vegas is going. Senator Kerry’s more than subtle hint that France has a right to veto America’s foreign policy dooms him.

“Of course, this is all predicated on Dean pulling close enough to Kerry to make things interesting”

Howard Dean only needs to finish in second place, 20 points behind or less will suffice. His obituary postings were premature. Dean will win the nomination.

“I don't think this will happen, and doubt Lieberman has legs with a Democratic primary electorate that wants its nominee to be anti-Bush, period and without ambiguity.”

Allow me to be a bit more blunt: the left of center Democrats voting for their party’s nominee demand that their winning candidate be deceitfully pacifist and anti-free trade. Zathras obviously prefers to avoid mentioning the reasons why these folks will not be supporting Senator Joseph Lieberman.

I think if Dean gets a credible second or even a win (extremely unlikely), it will make one hell of an interesting race, but do the Dems no favors.

If Dean were to win in the end, he'd get crushed. The South has seen enough that he may as well not bother with the entire region. alongside, I can't imagine a Southerner (Edwards) hitching to that wagon for any reason, except maybe a black southerner like John Lewis, who will pick up black votes that Dean already has. The rest of the country, well, I think many of us have seen enough of Mr. Dean to know that we'll be seeing it all again (and again and again) as RoveCo tattoos Dean's myriad of gaffes on all our brains all summer long. If Iraq/WoT goes well, Dean is toast. If something catastrophic happens, his (and loose cannon supporters) subtle but gleeful "tolja so, tolja so" over the bodies of dead Americans will go REEEEAL well.

So Dean'll lose, and most poeple know it. But if he does well Tuesday, he might fight all the way to the convention. And THAT will be a sight to see.

In that way, New Hampshirites might hold the future of the Democratic Party in their hands tomorrow night.

your predicts follow the media exactly. I prediect dean in NH, kerry a close second. adn then kerry will win the rest of teh way. NH will be dean only win.

Actually, I noted precisely the reason Democratic voters would prefer to support someone other than Joe Lieberman. Anyone is of course welcome to assert that they have different motives, but I would just as soon they not associate me with their opinions.

Clark will do poorly, but beat out Joe for 4th. Lieberman quits. Clark throws everything he has at one or two 2/3 states, probably AZ.

The buzz is still with Edwards.

Kerry will win and give another meandering, weird victory speech. Luckily for him, directional mikes will mean no one can hear the crowd snoring, just as the mikes made Dean seem hysterical, when he was trying to be heard over cheers.

Ellis>> Novak has been reduced to quoting
Ellis>> "an elderly couple" in his hotel lobby

No doubt the elderly couple is George HW Bush and Barbara Bush, revealing the identities of CIA operatives related to people with the temerity to criticise their beloved Dubya.

I predict the media will start taking it easy on Dean, for the same reason no one is ever kicked out of Hollywood: because of The Scream, Dean attracts attention from people who don't follow politics. He is now a prime time political entertainer with tabloid notoriety. The ratings he garners guarantee him a spotlight for some time to come. Witness, as an early example of this trend, Blitzer's kind interview today of the Deans.

Since today seems like a good day to play pundit, and my guesses are no more stupid than anyone else's, here's my prediction:

Kerry - 36%
Dean - 22%
Edwards - 20%
Lieberman - 13%
Clark - 9%

The oldman already made his predictions a days back after the Iowa caucuses, when everybody thought Dean was finished for good. Back then he said Dean finishes in NH first or second, Kerry is the horse to beat, and that Edwards' campaign begins stalling on organization and money shortfalls. Looked good then, and looks better now.

What truly amuses me however then and now is the commentators, some of them Democrats no less, who accused Dean as being too outre' liberal and some of whom offered of all people Kerry as the "more conservative" candidate:

I quote from MSNBC Kerry saying:
Kerry shrugged off criticism from Republicans that he is a liberal who cannot compete in the South, saying “if what they want is to start calling me names, they’ve got a problem. If the worst thing they can say about me is I’m a liberal or something, I say 'let’s go, bring it on.”’ [emphasis added]

In fact, I remember in particular one Democratic commentator from the Carolinas screaming practically that if Dean was stuffed down their throats, he'd vote for Bush instead. Wonder if "I will lose the South," Kerry is looking better to him now. Pucker up. ;-D

Mr. Matt,

I agree with you. The Dean "Yeagh!!!" Scream just goes to show that in the right hands there is no such thing as bad publicity. It's like the "Crazy Al" late-night used-car salesman commercials. But give him some credit, Dean has been spinning this like heck and he's been media savvy enough to squeeze a Diane Sawyer interview, a Letterman "Top 10" countdown, and a Matthews' Hardball inquisition - I mean interrogation - I mean interview out of the deal. ;-) He's been working hard on his comeback, and who knows if it will succeed but he clearly "get's it" about what went wrong at least about the "crazy red-faced rants" he's promised to have less of.

Dan writes: I could very easily be wrong, in which case the current Senator from Massachusetts will start to resemble a former Senator of Massachusetts. If I'm right, however, then the Kerry balloon could pop, and the current Senator from Massachusetts will start to resemble... a former Senator from Massachusetts.

Great line, but one of the things you left out (pun intended) is his current resemblence to the current Senator from Massachusetts.

David -- I don't think Dean wins this thing, and, in fact, I think his campaign essentially goes down today. Kerry will beat him by 15% or more, and then he has to turn South and West to unfriendly territory. He won't compete in a single Feb. 3rd state.

The race will pivot today into a Kerry vs. Edwards affair. I believe Edwards to be a significantly better option. It's a question of whether you want experience (but experience that includes a lot of stuff the Republicans can pick on) or political skills and a shorter resume.

Edwards can beat the shortcomings of his limited resume because he is substantive (more specific in his agenda than any other candidate), because he sells his agenda well, and because he can select a VP with strong foreign policy credentials to round out the ticket.

He's the choice. A significant underdog to Kerry right now, but the best choice.

Don't forget the other primary race... I did an entry at WatchBlog this afternoon (in the Republican column), about the presidential primary on the GOP side. Check it out...

Congratulations on your prediction. Lieberman, though, just might decide to retire.

A Kerry win is fantastic! It will put him out in the open, out from the shadow of Ted Kennedy (who, it must be admitted, casts a rather large shadow).

Kerry says, "...if that's the best they can do...". Well, JFK (his middle name is Forbes), there's a truckful more. Let's talk about Kerry in 1971 and the Vietnam Veterans Against the War (VVAW), funded initially be Jane Fonda, and the anti-war demonstrations he organized in Washington.

NRO has a good starting piece on Kerry:

Kate’s Take: No Vets’ Vet

and

Vetting the Vet Record

He threw out his medals in 1971. He should stop telling people he served in Viet Nam. (He did, of course, but as he's been ashamed of it for 30 years, he ought to shut up.)

I have posted New Hampshire Prediction Results. Check it out.