So now what?

Chuck Todd Chief White House correspondent and political director • Profile

WASHINGTON - As anticipated, the most fascinating presidential race in a generation has just gotten more fascinating.

Both parties have either dual frontrunners or no frontrunners, depending on your point of view. Nobody has a clear shot at either nomination and believe it or not, after both Iowa and New Hampshire, we still have six plausible presidents (two Democrats and four Republicans with two wild cards who can determine the eventual winner).

So where do we go from here? And what's each candidate's path to the nomination now?

Let's start with the easy side: the Democrats. It's now a two-person race between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama. Sorry John Edwards, but the party appears to be dividing in two between the old establishment (Clinton) and the new establishment (Obama). Edwards doesn't have the money for paid media or the poll numbers for free media to keep in this race. He needed Obama to thump Clinton in New Hampshire so he could be the last man standing. That plan is out the window.

What makes Edwards relevant, though, is his 10-15 percent support. Where does it go? Do the blue-collar, conservative Dems go with Clinton or are these folks anti-Clinton first and pro-Edwards second making them likely Obama supporters? Both theories are plausible and I won't begin to speculate. One thing's for sure, both Clinton and Obama are going to be making strong plays for his support from here on out.

With our Edwards addendum out of the way, let's get to the Clinton and Obama paths, neither of which are clear.

Among the good problems Clinton has acquired since her Tuesday primary win is the need to find another state where she can win. When it appeared she would lose New Hampshire, there were whispers she would skip both Nevada and South Carolina. She can't do that now, at least as far as Nevada's concerned, since she's led every public poll in that state.

One thing Clinton doesn't want to do is lose both Nevada and South Carolina. But a split makes Feb. 5 doable. Losing both makes Feb. 5 a bit more troublesome. Of the two, Nevada seems like the better place for her to notch a win since South Carolina's demographics give Obama such an apparent advantage.

Handicapping Nevada is very difficult. The state's never really done this before and one wonders how insider-ish this thing is going to be. Nevada is a state of interest groups and those interest groups usually have more sway in a primary than in the average state. Will that still be the case come Jan. 19? We'll see.  Turnout has been up everywhere. Who's to say Obama doesn't turn this caucus into a primary, a la Iowa?

Before Iowa, I would have made Clinton the definite favorite in Nevada. Now? I think it's a coin toss. She's got the old-school establishment with her, but Obama's got the support of the key union in the state - the Culinary union. This will be the first test of where Edwards' vote goes since, like, Iowa, a candidate needs 15 percent threshold and I'm guessing Edwards will now have problems reaching that in some places.

MORE FROM

Section Front

Obama campaign head gets big book deal Officials turn down Franken request Joe the Plumber to become war correspondent Franken lead at 49 with absentees left to count Minn. Senate winner won't be known in 2008 First Read: 'Twas the seventh week of recount... Franken opens first lead in Minn. Senate race Mom of Palin daughter's boyfriend arrested Minn. court weighs rejected absentee ballots Minnesota panel reviews disputed ballots Section Front   Add headlines to your news reader: