John Edwards' Long, Slow Slide

John Edwards, suffering in the polls and increasingly seen as a second-tier candidate, is reshuffling his campaign's strategy more dramatically than virtually any Democrat so far this year. The former North Carolina senator is faced with a crucial question: How many eggs can he fit in his Iowa basket?

After the 2004 race, Edwards practically made Iowa his second home. Since Edwards lost his bid to become vice president, he has made at least thirty trips to the state, far more than any other candidate. "He's building on his strength, which is in Iowa, because he poured so much effort into it last time around," said University of Iowa Professor Cary Covington.

That strategy seems to have thus far paid off. "Iowa's a state where advertising has played second fiddle to personal contacts and personal connections. Edwards has developed that kind of capital in the state," Covington said.

Edwards' fundraising is better this year than it was his first time around. Through the second quarter of 2003, Edwards' presidential coffers held $8.1 million in reserve. Through the second quarter of this year, his bank account swelled to $13.3 million.

But compared with his rivals, Edwards is in a much worse position than he was four years ago. In July 2003, John Kerry had just under $10.9 million in the bank. Last month, Clinton reported $45.2 million on hand while Obama held nearly $36.3 in reserve. That financial hole is one from which Edwards' strategy comes. "The reality of the strategy says, 'We don't have the money to compete everywhere,'" says Democratic consultant Eric Adelstein, currently unaffiliated with a White House campaign.

But while Edwards built what was thought to be a formidable lead in Iowa, the one-time Hawkeye State frontrunner has recently seen his steady support slowly erode. A poll conducted last October, by the Democratic firm Harstad Strategic Research (which now polls for rival Senator Barack Obama), showed Edwards leading by 20 points, at 36%, to Hillary Clinton's 16% and Obama's 13%. In early April, Edwards' RCP Average led the field at 31.3%. His average now trails Clinton's, at 24% to her 26.3%.

The former Senator's poll numbers wouldn't be a problem, many analysts say, if Edwards were plotting his campaign differently. Edwards' strategy "certainly seems to be putting all the chips in Iowa," national political analyst Rhodes Cook said. For him to be successful, and even to survive until the February 5th Super Duper Tuesday, "he needs to win it."

Edwards' campaign disputes the notion that he may be slipping in Iowa. "John Edwards is strong in Iowa right now because this election, more than ever, is about voters wanting to go in a new direction," campaign spokeswoman Colleen Murray said.

Without the overwhelming bank accounts Clinton and Obama boast, Edwards is unable to run a national campaign like the two front-runners. "He's made a strategic choice that the best way to vault himself to serious consideration is to win Iowa," Covington said. For Edwards, said Adelstein, "it's all dependent on that bounce out of Iowa."

Reports suggest that Edwards, instead of expanding his campaign, is zeroing in on Iowa more so than he has in the past. He recently shifted campaign staff from Nevada, another state with early caucuses, to Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina, condensing his operations. That, says Adelstein, is a problem. "As the map narrows for a candidate, it's the tell-tale sign that they're in trouble."

Even if Edwards does win Iowa, the condensed primary calendar could take its toll. With other contests likely to follow so soon and in such rapid succession, momentum gained in Iowa may not mean as much this year as it has in previous cycles. "The danger is it's kind of an all-or-nothing thing," said Rhodes Cook. "The term 'all,' in this case, may mean you live to fight another day."

The pressure of winning Iowa may be getting to Edwards. At a recent appearance in Creston, Iowa, Edwards suggested that, because of his positions, an unnamed "they" are out to get him. "I'm out there speaking up for universal health care, ending this war in Iraq, speaking up for the poor. They want to shut me up."

"If we don't stand up to these people, if we don't fight them, and if we don't beat them, they're going to continue to control this country," Edwards said.

Other campaigns say they smell blood in the water. "Our ID calls in Iowa have shown a pretty clear and steady erosion in Edwards' support over the past several weeks," said a staffer for a rival campaign. "Their flailing and almost palpable sense of desperation over the past few weeks, I think, confirms that."

Edwards' rhetoric relating to his opponents has been sharper as well. At a recent debate sponsored by the AFL-CIO, Edwards took a barely veiled jab at former President Bill Clinton, and by extension his wife, standing just a few steps to Edwards' side, for supporting NAFTA. At a forum with liberal bloggers, Edwards criticized Clinton's refusal to return contributions from lobbyists.

His campaign maintains that their goal "is to make sure that every possible voter knows that John Edwards is the strongest Democratic nominee with a bold vision that makes him the most electable in blue states, red states, and the entire country," Murray, the campaign spokeswoman, said.

Even Edwards' wife, Elizabeth, has launched a series of blistering attacks on the two frontrunners. In the latest salvos, Elizabeth Edwards criticized Clinton's stances on Iraq and Obama's "holier than thou" attitude. "They weren't leaders," she said of her husband's two rivals.

The decision to point out flaws in opponents is one that carries risks and benefits. "Because he's losing traction," said Covington, Edwards "does need to go on the offensive here in Iowa."

But in his first run, Edwards "made his name in Iowa with his pledge not to attack his competitors." While former Congressman Dick Gephardt and former Vermont Governor Howard Dean spent months at each other's throats, mutually assuring destruction, "Edwards came across as the nice guy who wouldn't say anything bad about anybody."

"There's negative, where you trash your opponent, and there's negative where you contrast yourself with your opponent," Covington said. "That's a very fine line to draw." Elizabeth Edwards' comments aren't helping keep her husband on the safe side, Covington continued. "She might have stepped over that line a little bit."

All is not lost for the Tarheel. His position in the race "is not a good sign," said Cook. "On the other hand, John Kerry didn't look that great through 2003 either."

But while the two frontrunners have a niche, Edwards' place in voters' hearts is less clear. "I'm not sure what the premise of his candidacy is, frankly, other than that he was the vice presidential nominee," Adelstein said.

Shifting staff, narrowing the map and sharpening his attacks, Adelstein continued, are clear signs that Edwards' campaign is not going as planned. "He's still alive, but he's certainly second tier to Clinton and Obama," he said.