With just one month left before the Iowa caucuses, what appeared to be a Clinton runaway is now turning into a real horserace. Ever since her dismal performance in a debate about a month ago, she has lost ground week after week. The numbers keep getting worst for the frontrunner and right now, she can be seen as very vulnerable. Excluding my support for Edwards, I think this is still a positive development since it means the issues will be discussed more fully over the next couple of months.

The rapid fall of Senator Clinton's poll numbers is somewhat amazing. In the Rassussen National Daily Tracking Poll, she has fallen 12% since the end of October. From a high of 49%, she is now down to 37% with only a 13% lead over Obama. The decline has been steady and dramatic. Obama only needs about 7% and he will have the lead in the national polls. Given the history of the last month, this does not appear impossible.

The news is not only grim for Senator Clinton nationally. In Iowa, there is a reasonable chance that she could place third behind Obama and Edwards. Currently, the three top candidates are basically in a tie, but she has been losing ground over the last couple of weeks. Given that Edwards does extremely well among second choice voters in the caucus system, it is likely that he will either place first or a close second. If she does place third in the race, it will change the nature of this Presidential election overnight.

Jeff Soukup of San Francisco, who is an extremely astute political activist, has done an in depth analysis of Iowa's voting patterns and history. In a nine page memo, he sums up the following:

Analysis of Three Iowa Voting Scenarios: from “Very Conservative” to “Most Likely.” The detailed analysis shows the impact of:

1. Second Choice Voting – an essential factor in Iowa that’s almost completely ignored by the press. Impact: John wins with 35% of the vote.

2. “No Shows” – a number of folks who say that they will attend the caucus (including people who say that they are “certain” that they will attend) end up not attending. Impact: John wins with 36% of the vote.

3. Non-Viability – just as there is no “national primary”, there is no “Iowa caucus”. Instead, the Iowa totals will be a compilation of the total number of delegates selected on a precinct-by-precinct basis, akin to electoral college voting. As a result, candidates need strength throughout the state, not just in select urban areas. In certain precincts, even some the top three candidates may not reach the 15% threshold for viability and, therefore, may not receive any votes from those precincts. Impact: John wins with 40% of the vote."

In New Hampshire, which has to be Senator Clinton's fallback position, the Rassussen telephone poll released this week shows that Senator Clinton has fallen from a 23% lead in September to only a 7% lead over Obama. A shift of 5% will put Obama in the lead. That is not out of the question, especially if she places third in Iowa. A failure to win two in a row will make this a wide open race and anyone can win.

Ironically the early primary system that was intended to benefit Senator Clinton might come back to haunt her. The massive media attention around her defeats would make it almost impossible to regain the momentum. The intensity of the coverage will be surreal. When President Clinton had problems in the New Hampshire primary with the personal Flowers issue, he had time to recover and build momentum. The current situation will barely allow anyone time to breath.

A year ago, it was assumed that Senator Clinton would by far out-raise all the other candidates and even a minor set back could be endured by her significant financial advantage. Now Obama is keeping pace with her fundraising, Edwards is raising enough to be a viable alternative and of course there is always Al Gore waiting in the wings to take his bow in Denver.