Sounded fine on the radio.

He's in a tough position, trying to increase his profile without looking desperate. I thought he did fine. Handled the silly question about how a white male candidate could run in this field as well as he could. He did well in a couple of lighter moments, and generally stayed on message.

I actually thought Edwards had a pretty good performance tonight.

Remember that the important audience here is folks seeing the candidates for the first time. That's the "black box" to be trying to imagine.

I still can't believe Edwards is 54 years old.

Remember that the important audience here is folks seeing the candidates for the first time. That's the "black box" to be trying to imagine.

Exactly. Edwards gave bits of his stump because his audience wasn't sympathetic journos like Ezra who get bored, or even fanboys like me who remain mesmerized by the unabashed leftism of the stump, but people who don't really have much of any idea what John Edwards is about.

He still needs something maybe a step short of a miracle and incredible non-SEIU union mobilization to win, but I think he did well. Instead of going all out on the negative in desperation, he ran as himself, made distinctions fairly, and emoted his cornball heart out. I thought it was good.

I also note that while Edwards is surely fighting to win NV, he's also fighting to remain viable, over the 15% threshold, so that when convention time comes, he'll have the necessary delegates and supporters to have leverage against the nominee to fight for his issues and constituencies.

Luntz's focus group went for Edwards:

Edwards Declared the Winner by a Focus Group of Undecided Nevada Voters. On Fox News, Frank Luntz’ focus group from Las Vegas of thirty undecided Nevada Democrats declared Edwards the winner.

Luntz:

"How many of you thought John Edwards won?" [1/2 crowd raises hand]

"How many of you came in supporting Senator Edwards?" [About 3 people raise hand]

"On issue after issue, we’re going to show this to you tomorrow night, his language actually scored better than Senator Clinton and Senator Obama."

These things are all about folks seeing the show for the first time.

Luntz's focus group had Obama and Romney winning big in the debates the weekend before NH. We all know how that turned out. So I'm uncertain as to how valuable a data point this is.

"Luntz's focus group had Obama and Romney winning big in the debates the weekend before NH. We all know how that turned out. So I'm uncertain as to how valuable a data point this is."

I think it's actually a pretty good data point about how a particular debate got perceived by low-information partisans.

The problem is that the number of Nevada Dems who were watching last night is relatively low. So it's only a relatively minor data point in terms of the NV caucus outcome.

But if things are close, every little bit helps.

-----

Folks are still counting out the best candidate with the best message a wee bit too soon.

We're only two weeks into what may well be a twelve week or longer process.

I thought so too before NH. But the actual election results suggest that either Luntz got it wrong or that the debate hardly mattered.

Edwards has the great advantage that people "like" him, the more they see/hear him. Unfortunately with the press focused almost entirely on ClintoBaman and his relative lack of funds the debates are almost the only time this happens.

Donate on Friday and let's see how this plays out.

It is really a great post, it contains many useful information

Edwards DOES do better when he's standing, particularly when he gets to talk directly to the crowd (and get facial reaction - as in the stump situation).

This shouldn't be a surprise: he's spent a lifetime standing (always standing in courtroom when speaking) in front of juries arguing the case for a plaintiff injured somehow by the action of some 'bad guys'. It's his natural habitat.

Excellent analysis from TomP over at Kos:

http://www.dailykos.com/storyonly/2008/1/16/92411/2698/631/437698

It's also hard to break through when Obama gets 28 questions, Hillary 23, and Edwards 19, or when Edwards gets less than 22 mins, Hillary just over 27, and Obama 34.

As well-known conservative Eleanor Clift said on The McLaughlin Group last week, the Edwards candidacy is a sideshow at this point, and he's the only one who doesn't seem to realize it.

She forgot about some of his more die-hard fans.

I thought he had the best moment of the debate where he talked about 200,000 of the nations Veterans go homeless each night.
Very powerful.

I think the debate was a three way tie. They all sounded smart and capable. I'm an Edwards supporter since day one, though, so it's nice to see some media attention towards him.