Loudocracy
Tuesday, January 20, 2004
* Politics
This is a repost from my diary on DailyKos.
So we're down to four real candidates. Kos thinks the order may be Dean, Kerry, Edwards, Clark. I suppose I agree, although we'll certainly know more as the week progresses. Here's my issue: I don't like Kerry. I'd be thrilled to have any of Clark, Dean, or Edwards (in alphabetical order) as the Democratic nominee.
What if, hypothetically, the Dean decline continues this week and Kerry starts polling as the favorite in New Hampshire?
If I were New Hampshire voter (and I am not), I might then decide that my vote could best be used strategically to pick an anti-Kerry among the three remaining choices. How should I vote?
My thesis: I think at this point that Edwards would make the best anti-Kerry. Here's my reasoning.
- Edwards has the momentum. Elections are all about momentum, and he's got it, while Dean and Clark don't.
- Edwards should crush Kerry in the South Carolina primary, which is the biggest primary on February 3.
- Edwards is the best speaker of the three. This was proven again last night; his post-Iowa speech was head and shoulders above Dean's.
- As compared to Dean, Edwards has a geographical advantage since both Dean and Kerry are both New Englanders.
- As compared to Clark, Edwards is doing much better with women voters.
- Edwards' one big disadvantage is the money issue. However, I'm not so sure this is the deciding factor for two reasons. First, as Iowa demonstrated, organization maybe isn't as important as momentum. Second, Kerry doesn't have much cash either, so it's more of a fair fight (as opposed to, say, Edwards vs. Dean if Dean had remained the front-runner).
