When asked if there was value at 9-1 (now 10-1)
Based on what we know now, yes. There's an easy argument to make for him winning Iowa, Nevada and South Carolina. If he wins 3 of the first 4 states, he's got a strong shot at that point. The counter argument is that if he doesn't win Iowa he is cooked. Hillary and Obama can hang around until Super Tuesday even if they win nothing, Edwards doesn't have that margin for error.
Something to keep in mind. Edwards is the only viable white male in the race and I think that matters. I talked to xxxxx about this recently and he had an interesting point. First, Hillary simply will not play. Second, there are concerns that Obama's race could be a reall issue...unfortunately. Third, Edwards has a good populist message and is strong with the unions. That will matter in the primaries and may make Edwards the safe choice for those concerned about Obama and Hillary.
About 2 weeks before Iowa folks will get pragmatic about who is the "most electable." Somehow that gave us John Kerry last time who was more electable than the even more liberal Howard Dean. Although I wouldn't discount the fact that Hillary is the only woman running for the nomination in the mommy party. All the male candidates may split 65% of the vote and Hillary may be able to win by getting 35% every time. Edwards makes sense to me...at least today.
