The blogosphere, along with print pundits, is busy this morning hauling an alive-and-kicking Sen. John Edwards out of the very grave it had previously dug for him.
Caught off-guard by Edwards strong second place finish last night, the digital pundits are nonetheless not at a loss for words.
Blogging on the Daily Kos, Tom Schaller writes, “John Edwards has two weeks to prove he can get at least three wins on March 2.” Schaller pegs Georgia and Ohio as the two most likely victories and continues, “He’ll still need a third, significant win … which just might be New York — at first blush, a strange place for a Southern millworker’s son to win. But anyone familiar with the post-industrial situation along the Upstate I-90 corridor between Albany to Buffalo … knows that Edwards’ message will resonate well Upstate.”
The exit polls reveal “the whole Kerry electability thing is a bit of a crock,” says Andrew Sullivan. He carries on, “Yes, [Edwards] seems a little jejune. Yes, his protectionism is worrying. But he is so obviously a better speaker and a better candidate than the current front-runner. “
Via the fervently anti-Kerry Mickey Kaus, John Ellis opines, “What [the Kerry campaign] dread[s] most of all is negative momentum, because (let’s face it) the candidate has no strong base of support within the party. They’re only for him because he’s winning. Once he starts losing, he’s a loser.”
Who knows what will happen, but one thing is for sure. In the words of Jeff Jarvis, “Every time you think this race is over…it isn’t.”
And we conclude with our favorite Drudgette, Wonkette (isn’t she addictive?). “We love it when TV talking heads pretend they haven’t seen exit polls,” she writes. “Chris Matthews and company keep referring to what might happen after Wisconsin ends up a ‘close two-man race,’ and then backpedaling, ‘I mean, if that’s what happens.’” Now that’s hardball.