Iowa: Some What-Ifs (D)

» Reallocated Numbers Based on Second Preferences Gives Edwards A Solid Lead
» DMR: New Iowa Poll: Obama widens lead over Clinton
» NYT: Campaigns Feeling Effects of Iowa Poll

So, depending on the hypothetical, there's support for a big Edwards win and support for a big Obama win. Meanwhile, both Pollster and RCP have Clinton ahead on the averages.

What a big Edwards win does is string out his campaign. He'll get a boost in NH, as has already been witnessed. He'll live on through Super Tuesday, even. But the net effect of all that would be that the next president, most likely, would not be named either John Edwards or Barack Obama.

I'm a bit skeptical of the methodology used in the Insider Advantage poll that reallocated the non-viables. Maybe I'm too high on Biden & Richardson, but I'm doubtful that all of their support has to switch. I'd fully anticipate there being pockets of support for each where they register over 15%, and hence their delegates don't move. Where I might want to hedge my bet is whether Edwards has any nonviables. Still, if he doesn't then that has to hurt Obama more than anyone else I see. Kucinich has already made his announcement to boost Obama. No prob ... just remind me how you add an asterisk again?

The DMR poll showing a sizable Obama lead is another wrinkle. The conventional wisdom is that if there are ample newcomers to the process, then it's an Obama runaway. Just on the anecdotals, there's reason to believe that. But there's also reason to believe that they won't show up. It'll no doubt be the biggest coin toss of a bet for Iowa, I think. In sum, it's possible to see it happening. But it just depends on what assumptions you want to make about the turnout model. Oh, and also whether you believe that 40% of Democratic caucus-goers really are "independent."

Nothing really alters the calculus that I originally guesstimated. But the prospect of a "big win" warrants some additional thoughts. It's not out of the question, but I'll stick with a small Clinton win.

ADD-ON: Pollster's Charles Franklin echoes my sentiments:

The closeness of the Democratic race makes folly of any attempt to crown a winer based on the polls. Aside from the polling difficulties, the unknown ability of the campaigns to mobilize their supports, and the effectiveness of turning out first time caucus goers is enough to make staying up Thursday night worthwhile.

Amen. Just make your pick and state your bias. Mine coincide on this one.

ADD-ON 2.0: Noam Schieber has a minute sampling of Biden folks and reports some good cheer for Edwards supporters. It doesn't get much more minute than a sample of 4 people, but still. The race certainly feels like it's that close.

ADD-ON 3.0: Dan Conley has some notes worth reading, some conventional, but some better. Among the points worth adding to the mix are the entrance polls. I think Conley's right that they'll be part of the spin afterwards if they differ from the ultimate ordering ... and not just on the Dem side. He's also thinking the likelihood of GOP & Indie involvement in the Dem caucuses will be notable. I'll wait and see on that one. Given his set of predictions, the pick for Edwards to win and Clinton to finish third make some sense. Maybe that's why I'm doubtful.