It all comes down to GOTC.

Its a three-way tie and its going to be won by the campaign with the best ground game. Obama is seeing crowds that are two to three times bigger than the other campaigns.

Consider this from JUST the past three days:

600 attend an Obama event in Burlington.
500 attend an Obama event in Keokuck.
900 attend an Obama event in Davenport.
900 attend an Obama event in Coralville--during a snowstorm.
400 attend an Obama event in Clinton.
400 attend an Obama event in Marshalltown.
500 attend an Obama event in Ottumwa last night. 400 attend an Obama event in Knoxville today. 500 attend an Obama event in Newton.

I heard they were already expecting 1000+ in Cedar Rapids and another 1,000 in Ames....He will be in Des Moines tonight.

He has been endorsed by more Iowa newspapers than anyone:

Marshalltown Times-Republican--central Iowa's Daily paper

Sioux City Journal--serving the states western citizens

Ottumwa Courier

Iowa City Press Citizen

Woodbine Twiner/Logan Herald-Observer

Daily Iowan

Iowa State Daily

Des Moines' El Latino

On Meet the Press Obama expressed confidence in his ground operation in Iowa. "We have as good of an organization as I think people have ever seen in Iowa, and this is going to be a tight race," he said. "I think the polls are going to be bouncing up and down over the next five days, but what we're confident about is that if our folks come to the caucus and participate, then we're going to do very well."

According to the New York Times: The Clinton, Edwards, and Obama camps seem to agree with this: -- if turnout equals 2004 (approx. 125,000), advantage Edwards. -- if turnout is slightly up (say, 130,000-140,000), advantage Clinton. -- and if turnout is way up there (think 140,000+), advantage Obama.

Asked whether he could be hurt by a lower turnout in Iowa, Obama said that's not what he is expecting. "I think everybody is predicting a big turnout at this point."

Well I guess Dodd has given up on his bid for VP. Can anyone say: being First Lady does not equal experience?

Dodd: Clinton was sitting on the sidelines

DES MOINES, Iowa (CNN) - Hillary Clinton may tout her 35 years of experience as the principal reason to vote for her, but Chris Dodd says counting her eight years in the White House as First Lady as a qualification "is an exaggeration, in my view. That's not experience, that's witnessing experience."

At the launch of his "Caucus For Results" bus tour, the Connecticut senator told a crowd at his Iowa campaign headquarters that "it's not just enough sitting on the sidelines and watching your husband deal with problems over the years," to argue that his 26 years in the Senate are better suited to bring people together and deal with unexpected events like the assassination of former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto.

Dodd said the New York senator's claim that her time as First Lady was experience would be like his wife Jackie taking credit for his Family Medical Leave Act, adding, "The experience of having witnessed history is not the same as having helped create it."

"He said yesterday that he's going to ask [Baldick] to do it, and my attitude is that if you can't get your former campaign manager and political director to do what you'd like, then it's going to be hard to get the insurance companies and drug companies to do what you want."

"The fact is this is somebody who worked for John Edwards, for the last who knows how many years, who's a good friend and colleague of Edwards, who's now running a 527 that is running ads on behalf of John Edwards. [Laugh] You're telling me has no influence over him? That's not true. If [Obama communications director] Robert Gibbs started running a 527 and I called Robert Gibbs and said stop running ads on my behalf are you suggesting I would have no influence over Robert Gibbs?"

"We can't argue on the one hand that we're going to be reformers unless the things that need to be reformed advantage us -- and then we're less the fighter on behalf of reforms," he said, referring to Edwards, who refers to himself as a "fighter."

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1 207/Obama_mocks_Edwards_on_527.html

According to Ben Smith:

In Oskaloosa, Iowa this morning, in response to a questioner who said he saw Hillary fading and the choice as between Obama and Edwards, the Illinois Senator suggested that outside spending on Edwards' behalf is part of a broader pattern with his rival.

"I don't just talk the talk, I walk the walk, I've been doing this all my life, and John has not had that same record," he said.

"John yesterday said that he didn't believe in 527s," he said. "We found out today that there's an outside group spending $750,000...and the individual who's running the group used to be John Edwards' campaign manager."

"You can't say yesterday you don't believe in them and today you're having three quarters of a million dollars being spent for you," he said.

http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith/1 207/Obama_hits_Edwards_on_527.html

Third party groups supporting Hillary plunked down an astonishing sum of nearly $300,000 in political spending in one day yesterday, a cash outlay that will almost all fund mailings and phone-bank calls.

FEC filings show that the pro-choice group Emily's List shelled out nearly $190,000 yesterday for mailers and phone banks, while the American Federation of Teachers spent nearly $95,000 yesterday, all on direct mail. The filings show the dates of the expenditures, but not necessarily when the mailings will be sent or the calls will be made.

The nearly $300,000 is a big one-day buy that will almost certainly unleash a wave of mailings in the next few days, most likely in Iowa and perhaps in New Hampshire. At least one third-party mailing has already caused controversy in the race: Yesterday John Edwards criticized the Hillary campaign over a mailer sent out by a pro-Hillary labor union attacking Barack Obama's health care plan, saying that the mailing's inclusion of an Edwards quote was designed to suggest that Edwards was behind it.

http://tpmelectioncentral.com/

I believe that the next seven days may determine Obama's future. I am a devotee of the 'win Iowa and New Hampshire theory' and the rest , by and large, fall like dominoes. The race won't be over until Feb. 5th.  But if Obama wins Iowa with any sort of convincing numbers, and bounces into a win in New Hampshire and South Carolina; Nevada is irrelevant and can go to any candidate. On Feb. 5th a coalition of African Americans and college educated urban dwellers will show up for Obama big time.

I also believe that Friday, December 21 is the defacto end of the campaign. Obviously the campaigns will go on via the TV and the mail boxes and the candidates will continue making speeches and shaking hands but the voters will go on an extended 11-12 day week-end. They don't call it the Friday night news dump for nothing.

So the next seven days are crucial.  Each day will have a media narrative that will help or hurt someone. It looks like the discussion of drugs have passed for the moment and today we get Bill Clinton on Obama's experience and 'rolling of the dice.' (devastating comment made worse if it was Rose's) Obviously they are going to pound away on experience all week--the devil you know...

This will take a toil after a while. Obama will have to reclaim the media meme at his press conference this afternoon.  It is coming down to experience vs. change. The Clinton's have decided to put all their marbles into diminishing Obama's experience . That is what we should expect to hear for the next seven days.

Edwards will likely stay positive. Not too many surprises.

Not sure what Obama will do. He has pleasantly surprised me by being so consistent, remaining above the fray, yet never letting an attack go unanswered.

Yesterday's news on the Wyoming dem chair discussing the 'locker room' component to Hillary's candidacy and its effect down ticket was ignored by everyone except drudge and the Denver post. Will this resurrect itself later this week? Will another dem take up the call?   I don't see the Pandora's box of bill's sex life being discussed except in round about ways until possibly super duper tuesday.

Will the press re-embrace the Clinton's?  Hard to imagine but in every election that I have observed the press always returns to the 'institutional' favorite.   I don't expect this time to be any different but possibly due to the compressed time-line and the so-called Christmas truce, the MSM won't have time to swing back to Hillary until after New Hampshire, which frankly could be too late.

Media narrative today is Bill, Bill, Bill. Will his words be twisted into a negative? Will Obama blast back? Who will win the news cycle today?  

From the Iowa Independant....

A lot can change in the course of a few weeks, which is evident both in the shifts in this week's power rankings and the continuing volatility of the presidential race in Iowa.  Recent polls have varied a bit in their candidate rankings, but they all seem to agree on one point: the presidential race is far from settled.

Look for one more very long week.

Below, we seek to answer to the question, "If the Democratic caucuses were held tonight, how would they result?"  We based these rankings on impressions we received from activists, staff, and caucus-goers across the state and, at the most basic level, gut feelings and instincts.  We hope only that our work provides one additional point of reference to readers who are interested in the perspective of Iowans who have watched the race unfold here for the past year.

If the Democratic caucuses were held tonight, here is how we think they would turn out:

First Place: Barack Obama

Barack Obama -- Upward Momentum -- Obama has enjoyed a great week of press following his events with Oprah Winfrey.  His organization is showing signs of real strength with its nearly 1,000 house parties across the state Thursday night, and he seems to have strong second-choice support.  If the caucuses were held tonight, he would win.

Second Place: John Edwards

John Edwards -- Edwards may still have the strongest organization in Iowa, but that is no longer enough to keep him in the number one spot.  His base of supporters is slowly shrinking, and many seem to be floating in Obama's direction.  Edwards still has many talented activists in his corner and may be viable in more rural precincts than Obama, but if the caucuses were held tonight, we predict he would take second.

Third Place: Hillary Clinton

Hillary Clinton -- Downward Momentum -- Clinton's campaign has demonstrated a renewed commitment to retail politics at recent events, but neither she nor her husband are drawing the large crowds they once did.  Fairly or not, she is slowly being branded as the 'negative' candidate, diminishing her second-choice support.  The excitement surrounding her candidacy is waning, and her campaign seems to be too busy putting out public relations fires from day to day to do much about it.  The campaign itself, along with independent groups like Emily's List, have devoted significant resources to build an organization here that should not be underestimated, but, if the caucuses were held tonight, we think she would finish third.

Woot!

http://iowaindependent.com/showDiary.do? diaryId=1643

This is worth the 27 minutes.  See how Iowa reporters view the race: Iowa Press on PBS. Taped Dec. 7.

http://www.iptv.org/iowapress/transcript _detail.cfm?ipShowNum=3514

So civil and free of spin.

Reporters are: DES MOINES REGISTER POLITICAL COLUMNIST DAVE YEPSEN, RADIO IOWA NEWS DIRECTOR KAY HENDERSON, ASSOCIATED PRESS SENIOR POLITICAL WRITER MIKE GLOVER, AND LEE NEWSPAPERS STATEHOUSE REPORTER CHARLOTTE EBY.