WI John Edwards wins 2008 Iowa Caucuses

At the end of 2007, opinion polls showed a close 3-way race in the Iowa Caucuses among Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, former Senator (and 2004 Vice-Presidential candidate) John Edwards, and Senator Barack Obama. The final result--Obama 38%, Edwards 30%, Clinton 29%--was a major boost to the candidacy of Obama, who had been trailing Clinton by double-digits in the national opinion polls for all of 2007. What if Edwards had won the Iowa Caucuses--Edwards 38%, Obama 30%, Clinton 29% ?
 
In that scenario, Clinton probably still wins New Hampshire, I'd give her the edge to win in that case and I don't have much doubt that she'd beat McCain (less youth turnout but would do better than Obama among older voters), although who McCain would nominate for Veep would be interesting, maybe nominating someone who's not an idiot for Veep would make the contest closer.
 
At the end of 2007, opinion polls showed a close 3-way race in the Iowa Caucuses among Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton, former Senator (and 2004 Vice-Presidential candidate) John Edwards, and Senator Barack Obama. The final result--Obama 38%, Edwards 30%, Clinton 29%--was a major boost to the candidacy of Obama, who had been trailing Clinton by double-digits in the national opinion polls for all of 2007. What if Edwards had won the Iowa Caucuses--Edwards 38%, Obama 30%, Clinton 29% ?

Thankfully, John Edwards, even if he wins the Iowa caucuses will get no where near the 2008 Democratic nomination, as there are still the issues of his affair, his fathering of his mistress' child and the deteriorating health of his wife circulating around. As the campaign progresses these issues will keep coming up a become a constant reminder to folks just how completely Edwards personifies the word sleazy.
 

Thande

Donor
I should think this delivers the nomination to Clinton. As Grattan says, Edwards' campaign would be a ticking time bomb that would only accelerate as the media spotlight swung onto him after winning Iowa, but his moment in the sun would last long enough for him to effectively compete with Obama in the South while Clinton cruises to victory in the states she won OTL, delaying Obama's rise long enough for Clinton to clinch the nomination.
 
ITTL you would have three strong candidates. o Obama and Edwards split the anti Hillary vote. s Say when did his affair become public knowledge?
 
There were Edwards staffers who knew of the affair and who agreed among themselves to leak news of it to the press should Edwards appear to be a serious contender for the nomination. The feeling was that if they did not and Edwards became the nominee, the Republicans were likely to find out about it and derail his campaign. I believe this is discussed in the Halperin/Heilmann book "Game Change".

With this in mind, it is likely that an Edwards win in Iowa would have led in short order to the implosion of his campaign in scandal. As to who would have won the nomination in that case, it is arguable, and the analysis depends to some degree on which candidate finishes second in Iowa.

Under the premise that Clinton finshed third (as was the OTL case and the one put forth by the OP) you can make two arguments. On the one hand, you can make the argument that Obama needed a win in Iowa to be viable and his campaign was indeed based upon that premise. On the other, the Clinton campaign was a cesspool of intrigue and incompetence that failed to place anyone in a senior role who actually understood the mechanics of the nominating process. All things being equal, with Clinton finishing third, I would give the edge to Obama on the basis of a superior strategy for accumulating convention delegates, as the Obama campaign had been organizing in key caucus states for some time prior to Iowa. In addition, the Obama campaign was better financed and had better financial management. Clinton spent foolishly and extravagantly in Iowa and already begun to develop cash flow issues after that contest.

Under the premise that Obama finished third, which is not altogether unreasonable if Edwards won given that they were competing for many of the same voters, the outcome becomes less clear. Obama would have been badly hurt by a 3rd place finish; the wholesale swing of black voters to Obama did not really take hold in the polling until after Iowa. Even then, though, the flaws in the Clinton campaign are still there. Unless Clinton won decisively in the February 7 Super Tuesday contests, there is a good chance that one is still left with a long delegate slog with the outcome in doubt. I'd give the edge in this contest to Clinton, but it would be by no means guaranteed unless she came close to running the table on February 7.
 
Last edited:
When did Edwards' affair with Hunter start?

If it came after Iowa, it might be butterflied.

The affair had been going on for a couple years by that point. In '08, Edwards' love child had been born, as the the National Enquirer claimed, in July, that Edwards was the baby's father and had photos of him visiting with the two in a hotel.

So, it was out there. As someone stated, people from the campaign were ready to sabotage the whole thing if it looked like he might win the nomination. So, even if he somehow contends with Hillary in other states, if he ever positioned himself as the Obama in this TL, it would have all come crashing down - leaving Hillary with the nomination.
 
Top