Is the conventional wisdom in the ongoing Presidential campaign going to be turned upside down on its ear again — this time in Iowa?
A new InsiderAdvantage Iowa poll suggests it could well happen. News stories so far have contained the assumption — based on polls, political analysis and reports from the scene — that the REAL big battle in Iowa was between New York Senator Hillary Clinton and Illinois Senator Barack Obama. But the new poll seemingly brings to the forefront a prediction that a some analysts have made: former Senator John Edwards (who has been working hard in Iowa) could pull off a win as the battling Clinton and Obama seemingly knock each other out:
John Edwards has leapfrogged over his rivals Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama, and leads the Democratic field in Iowa, according to the latest InsiderAdvantage/Majority Opinion poll. In the Republican caucus race, Mike Huckabee continues to hold a narrow lead over Mitt Romney.
How could this happen?
Is it due to Edwards increasingly fine-tuning his campaign style? Or his consistent emphasis of his populist message — that corporations have too much power and influence in America?
Or could it be that Clinton and Obama have begun to turn some voters off as they debate between the two camps increasingly centers on somewhat sleazy charges (mostly stemming from apparent surrogates from Hillary Clinton’s camp trying to “define” Obama drive up his negatives)?
Or, could it be a combination of all of the above? Regardless: this is proving to be a topsy-turvey election year. And even with THIS poll, the pollster says anything could happen:
The race among the three top Democrats is extremely close, with the potential for any of them to finish first – or third.
Edwards leads with 30 percent in a poll of Democratic voters who said they intend to participate in the Jan. 3 presidential caucuses, followed by Clinton with 26 percent and Obama with 24 percent. When the sample was narrowed to the most likely caucus-goers, based on several questions, Obama leads Edwards by less than a percentage point with 27 percent, with Clinton in third place at 24 percent.
Edwards holds a significant advantage, however, among a group who could be key to the first contest of the presidential year: those who say their first choice is someone other than the top three. Under Iowa Democratic Party rules, candidates who poll less than 15 percent in the first vote at each caucus around the state are eliminated, and their supporters get a second chance to vote for another candidate.
Under both screens, Edwards leads as the second choice of these voters, with Clinton trailing Obama.
“If Edwards is the second choice at this stage of those who intend to vote for other Democrats, then it would not be surprising if he produced a bit of a shock in Iowa,” said InsiderAdvantage CEO Matt Towery.
And then there is the other variable: a scandal. For instance, the National Enquirer now is touting one purportedly involving Edwards. It won’t be a “real” scandal unless it is reported extensively by the mainstream media (which will check it out to see if it’s worth reporting) and then dealt with by the Edwards camp.
But it shows how fluid this entire race is.
This poll is yet one more piece of bad news for the Clinton camp, and not exactly news that merits the Obama camp opening bottles of champagne.
Meanwhile, the Des Moines Register’s David Yepsen flatly says: don’t count Edwards or Republican Presidential wannabe actor Fred Thompson out.
Both Edwards and Thompson are pouring time and resources into Iowa these days. Edwards built a respectable organization in Iowa in his 2004 campaign. He was the front-runner here for a while, then gradually slipped as the attention focused on celebrity candidates Clinton and Obama.
But Clinton got off to a slow start and was never as popular here as she was around the country. Lately she, her campaign and her husband Bill have made mistakes that have left her struggling to right her top-heavy ship. Her campaign believes weekend endorsements by the Des Moines Register, Congressman Leonard Boswell and former Nebraska Sen. Bob Kerrey will pump some new energy into her campaign.
By contrast, Edwards and his people never quit, no matter how bleak things got in recent months. On Monday, he picked up Iowa first lady Mari Culver’s endorsement. And he still shows enough strength in rural Iowa that Obama is devoting considerable time to those areas these days in an effort to take some of the anti-Hillary vote from Edwards.
Proof of Edwards’ uptick and Obama’s jitters about him came Monday in Spencer, when Obama told a crowd: “Senator Edwards, who is a good guy, he’s been talking a lot about ‘I’m going to fight the lobbyists and the special interests in Washington.’ Well, the question you have to ask is: Were you fighting for (citizens) when you were in the Senate?”
According to Yepsen, Obama wouldn’t be attacking Edwards the way he is if “he was road kill.” He also contends that Obama’s internal polls show that the Illinois Senator has now “peaked.”
And, indeed, the Clinton-Obama war is now resembling a life-and-death, hand-to-hand combat in the trenches with few rhetorical holds barred. In recent weeks people associated with the Clinton camp have sent out emails fanning false allegations about Obama being a Muslim, a top Clinton official in New Hampshire tried (successfully, actually) to get the press to write about allegations of Obama’s youthful drug use, and Clinton supporter Senator Bob Kerrey fanned the flames of anti-Muslim sentiment in pointedly linking Obama with Muslims — TWICE.
Voters then have to choose sides, but there could be a segment that is weary and sees Edwards sticking to his campaign theme and aiming his guns at the GOP, rather than unloading both barrels on Democratic competitors (he had previously gone on fierce attack against Clinton).
Regardless, all predictions on this race are seemingly operative for about as long as the next poll or new twist comes out. As are blog posts (like this one).
On the Republican side, the race is unfolding as some have recently reported.
But don’t go to Las Vegas and bet your house on that outcome either. As Ed Morrissey notes, two dreaded words are now being whispered in the GOP: “brokered convention.”
And wouldn’t it be the supreme irony — and drama — if BOTH parties faced the dreaded B.C. words this summer?
Joe Gandelman is a former fulltime journalist who freelanced in India, Spain, Bangladesh and Cypress writing for publications such as the Christian Science Monitor and Newsweek. He also did radio reports from Madrid for NPR’s All Things Considered. He has worked on two U.S. newspapers and quit the news biz in 1990 to go into entertainment. He also has written for The Week and several online publications, did a column for Cagle Cartoons Syndicate and has appeared on CNN.