Originally posted by Peter The HegemonHard to see Edwards continuing to be very viable after getting 17% in a three-way race in the state next to (and similar to) his own.
It's not about viability for Edwards at this point, it is of positioning himself either to block a nomination or to play kingmaker. Proportional splitting of the delegates makes him viable if he stays around 15%. If he gets around 200 delegates, and there is a fight over Florida and Michigan, then he could be in an extremely powerful position in a close race.
Yeah - the whole proportional representation thing is really interesting. Since everyone can stay in it until February 5th, when most of the delegates are pledged, if Edwards can get a couple hundred or so by then he could conceivably limp along at 15% (or even less) and easily hold the balance of power at the convention.
I'm guessing you'll see an Obama/Edwards ticket if that happens, although if Clinton has beat Obama up enough by then and Edwards is relatively unscathed, you might see Edwards at the top of the ticket with a random Veep. Or heck, you even might see an out of the blue comprimise candidate at the top with Edwards as the Veep.
Hillary has got to get a majority of delagets (or close enough that she can bribe a few of superdelagates) as those who aren't with Hillary now basically want anyone but her, and everyone knows she's the least electable out of pretty much any conceivable Democratic nominee.
This reminds me of my thread in early 2003 when I bitched that in VA, it's illegal to be drunk in a bar. http://the-w.com/thread.php/id=8999 I think Texas' rationalization is a poor way of describing a good thing they're trying to do.