Thoughts on the Democrats' Primary

Due to party rules, every state in the Dem primary process (both primary and caucus states) assign delegates proportionally. I'm working off memory here, but this is done both on the congressional district and statewide level, with a 15% threshold. The party also has about twice as many delegates to their national convention (which is rather necessary for the proportional allocation system to work). In Iowa, there's another wrinkle of difference from the Republicans; they hold an initial vote and then allow the supporters of candidates who do not receive 15% support to switch their support to another candidate. This looks to benefit Edwards, as he's the overwhelming second choice of minor-candidate supporters according to a recent poll (between him, Obama, and Hillary, the breakdown was on the order of Edwards 60%, Hillary and Obama 20% each).

What each candidate needs to win the nomination:

Clinton: A win in Iowa would practically guarantee her the nomination. She's not out if she doesn't win, though. I think a third-place finish might actually benefit her more than a second-place finish, as it would keep two candidates viable as the "anti-Hillary" for later contests. If she does finish second, I think an Edwards win would benefit her more (or, hurt her less). She currently has sizable leads in Nevada and Florida, but early struggles could change that.

Obama: A win in Iowa is very important for him. He's running close to Hillary in New Hampshire (three of the four polls in the RCP average have him trailing by four points, while the fourth bizarrely has him trailing by 17), and a win in Iowa could give him the momentum to win in New Hampshire. Having these two wins under his belt would likely steer the nomination his way.

Edwards: Once again, a win in Iowa is very important. However, Edwards seems the least likely to turn an Iowa win into a nomination. He's not really competitive in New Hampshire, which will be a momentum killer. He's even polled poorly in South Carolina, which is supposed to be his home turf (it was certainly played up that way in 2004, when he won it), where Clinton and Obama each attract about a third of the electorate, while Edwards hovers around the threshold level. I have an easier time seeing any of the five major Republican candidates getting their party's nomination than Edwards getting his. That's fine, though, as Edwards's campaign does more to damage the country than any other. It's like having the negatives from all the candidates rolled into one.