The WI primary, that is. Several thoughts:
1). We’re going to start seeing articles about how Edwards is on a comeback, not to mention ones intimating that Kerry may be faltering. It is my pious hope that nobody reading this will be surprised by that revelation. What is more up in the air is whether this does represent the comeback of Edwards and/or faltering of Kerry; just because it’ll sell papers doesn’t mean that it’s false. Complicating matters are the next three primaries: Hawaii, Utah and Idaho. The latter two are not likely to be Kerry bastions, to put it mildly; heck, Utah Democrats are running its primary out of public libraries because the Republican-controlled legislature didn’t feel like allocating the cash for primaries this year*. Don’t expect any useful data until 3/2.
2). If Kerry falters and Edwards gains, the front-loading of the primaries is going to work against picking one candidate. Kerry needs less plurarities and more outright wins, and he seriously needs a two-man race. Edwards needs Howard Dean. Dean… as far as I can tell, Dean doesn’t need a damned thing, which is why I don’t think that he’s going to drop out of the race.
3). Zogby got this one seriously wrong. Worse-than-TN wrong. Either Zogby hasn’t calibrated open primaries properly, or he has difficulty assessing Edwards, or both. Either way, don’t automatically expect him to get GA correct.
And finally:
4). The percentage of people who will resist the temptation using this primary to grind whatever ax they feel like grinding will be rather small. Depressingly so, in fact.
Moe
*Before you freak about that, consider that under normal circumstances UT’s delegate allocation – for either party – would be about as significant to the real world as famous Accountants of the Baroque Period. You didn’t raise a stink when it happened, right? It’s hardly a secret; it was just that nobody really cared.
One can only hope for a grindstone shortage.
“*Before you freak about that”
Really no reason to freak at all. In Washington, the parties paid for their own primaries, and caucus-goers could donate at the door if they wanted to help. Sort of nice and communal-like.
“The percentage of people who will resist the temptation using this primary to grind whatever ax they feel like grinding will be rather small. Depressingly so, in fact.”
The primary results clearly demonstrate that European anti-Semitism may be a serious problem worth examining.
It also demonstrates inarguably that cancelling Angel is a terrible mistake.
A very terrible mistake. Where’s UPN when you need ’em?
Not to defend Zogby (I don’t know enough about polling to either defend or condemn until I reach hindsight) but I believe Wisconsin has an open primary meaning democrats, republicans and independents can all vote without changing affiliations. Perhaps Zogby was testing democrats because his predictions weren’t far off how Kerry did with exit poll declared democrats. Edwards did very well with republicans and independents.
Scratch my above post. I reread your comment and upon reflection my comment sounds inane. You had it right: Zogby doesn’t know how to test OPEN primaries.
Dean has officially quit the race.
And then there were four.
Why bother counting Sharpton and Kucinich?
For the same reason we bothered to continue to count Dean after NH – entertainment value. 😉
Seriously though, even at this late stage, I could envision a couple of scenarios where one or both of the two remaining fringe candidates could have an affect if the race gets tight between Kerry and Edwards. Kuchinich could draw away some of the Dean Dongs who might otherwise go to Edwards which might make a difference in some States between an Edwards victory and a Kerry victory (or at least affect the margins). If there are any more debates, Sharpton might turn his race huckster act on either Edwards or Kerry and could be using this as leverage to extort some patronage or at least do some damage.
But you are quite correct that neither ever had a chance of becoming the nominee.
“…both of the two remaining fringe candidates could have an affect….”
They both have an affect, though Kucinich’s is the most frightening. It’s a bit alien, isn’t it?
I doubt either candidate will have much effect on the nomination race, however.
How do you mean?
Thorley Winston: How do you mean?
He’s making a joke about “affect” vs. “effect.”
Got it, thanks Gromit.