Would he have won if Obama and Clinton didn't run, and he went up against McCain?
It's rather unlikely that both Obama and HRC would decline to run in 2008, but if that happens, yes, a scandal-free Edwards could win the nomination and if so he like any other plausible Democratic nominee would have won in November, given the worst financial meltdown since the Great Depression.
Not to mention public sentiment turning against the Iraq War.
The key question is, given that Edwards identified himself as much more of a populist than Obama, what would had been the major thrust of his administration in the first two years?
His Democratic opponents would have leaked the scandal if he had still been competitive heading into primary season.
IIRC there are two or three possible points of divergence earlier on in Obama's political career that could have seen him decide that politics wasn't for him.It's rather unlikely that both Obama and HRC would decline to run in 2008...
IIRC there are two or three possible points of divergence earlier on in Obama's political career that could have seen him decide that politics wasn't for him.
Edit: Apologies, I didn't mean to come across as trying to teach my grandmother to suck eggs; it was more that 'didn't run' covers both their not being in a position to run as well as making a decision not to.
But how likely is it that a single POD will prevent both HRC and Obama from running? I can think of lots of POD's that would rule out one candidacy or the other but it's hard to find one that prevents both (and presumably also butterflies away the Edwards scandal...) while leaving the basic condition of the country unchanged.
Easy. Clinton doesn't run for Senate in 2000, and Obama decides on getting more experience, leading to President Edwards. Or VP Edwards if Gore runs.
Obama wouldn't run in 08, not 04. Or they both get knocked out say if Edwards wins in Iowa and New Hampshire, but yeah, a LOT of PODs.Well, the Clinton decision not to run in 2000 and Obama's not to run in 2004 are presumably two independent decisions (I don't see how one would lead to the other). And it is doubtful that either or both of them will butterfly away the Edwards scandal. so it looks like three PODs are required...
Your friend actually gave me a very interesting idea... I might try a story with this. Interesting.OK, a friend of mine suggested this: Barack Obama travels to New York in 2006 to campaign for HRC's re-election for Senator (in a gesture of party unity). They're in the same campaign plane--which crashes, killing them both. That no doubt could shake up the schedule of John Edwards and/or Rielle Hunter that year.
BTW, Hunter eventually learned Edwards had a couple of other extramarital affairs, but she didn't find out about them until 2011, so we can assume they will not be public knowledge in 2008. But it points to a problem with "eliminate X's sex scandal" POD's--philanderers rarely stop with one transgression...
BTW, Hunter eventually learned Edwards had a couple of other extramarital affairs, but she didn't find out about them until 2011, so we can assume they will not be public knowledge in 2008. But it points to a problem with "eliminate X's sex scandal" POD's--philanderers rarely stop with one transgression...