John Edwards stealing the show

As the conventions approach - events that will more clearly than anything shape the coming battle in November for the presidency - it is the John Edwards sex and alleged payola scandal that has grabbed most of the headlines.

Rather than signalling a willingness to undermine the Democratic primary process, I'd suggest that Edwards, having failed to capture a significant shot at winning, tired of the process, leading him to succomb to the moral lapses that are now making headlines.

More significant than the affair - at least in terms of legality and credibility - are what appear to be hush payments. Although I doubt Edwards was involved in these you can make a case he bears more responsibility here than he appears willing to take on.

This episode may be good news for Obama, who has the lead and more than anything simply needs to just keep on keeping on. McCain, on the other hand, needs to either grab the spotlight or shine it on Obama problems. Edwards is keeping that from happening, and thus may have an interesting impact on our attention deficit political process.

Swiftboating backlash?

Although historically negative advertising has been very effective in many elections, I think the upcoming Obama and McCain campaigns have the potential to change the way elections are run. Not so much because they are virtuous - though I think both candidates are good guys - but because voters may actually have become sophisticated enough to reward a higher road.

This may be too optimistic but clearly Obama's campaign against Clinton appeared to benefit from taking a higher road. When Clinton attacked in debates and in advertising, Obama usually paried rather than fought back. I think many Americans found this very appealing. Clinton supporters feel that she was treated unfairly by press and by the Obama campaign but I think on balance both the Democratic and Republican primaries were dignified and without nearly the amount of negative campaigning there could have been given the years of political and personal baggage from most of the candidates involved in the races.

In terms of Obama vs McCain I think Obama has a huge edge in the sense he can easily lable McCain a Washington insider as he talks about Obama vs McCain's "change" themes. On the other hand McCain cannot label the young and politically inexperienced Obama much except as being young and inexperienced - arguably very desirable traits to many Americans in the current election as long as the candidate is smart and appealing as Obama certainly appears to be to most.

Democratic Debate in Iowa

The Democratic Iowa debate - the last before the caucuses - wrapped up without any major gaffes, though the focus groups seemed to be much more favorable to Obama and Edwards than Hilary Clinton.

Clinton certainly did not stand out the way she had in earlier debates, and as is often the case new "frontrunner" Obama seemed more poised and confident than he had in the earlier encounters.

Compared to the Republicans the democratic crew was downright sympathetic to each other. When the moderator asked a pointed question about Biden and some comments that could have been interpreted as prejudiced, Obama chimed in with an unqualified endorsement of Biden's history as a strongly pro civil rights candidate. Although I don't think it was contrived, I think this played very well with the audience.

Edwards continued to hammer home his populist notion that the rich and powerful are now in control and need to be taken out of control.

The Hilary Hater Factor

It is often suggested that Clinton can't win the election because her "negative" numbers are so high in many polls. Clearly Clinton is probably one of the most negatively viewed presidential candidates in some time, but I think people are mistaking current perception as future perception. George Bush, in addition to winning reelection, had positive perceptions of himself and his presidency until the Iraq war drained his reservoir of goodwill from the electorate. Conversely I think Clinton's solid campaign style, complete with her somewhat extreme personality makeover, will warm enough of her mild critics to prevent her losing on the basis of negative views about her.

Chris Mathews has been even more unstable than usual on Hardball, suggesting today - I think - that he's predicting Hilary will lose to Giuliani due to the negativity with which many perceive her, especially men.

Presidential Polls

This site has a GREAT summary of many presidential polls for the 2008 election.

On the Democratic side it's pretty clear that Hilary Clinton will be the nominee. My take is that even with a minor scandal or major gaff Hilary would withstand anything Obama could throw her way, and he's shown himself to be inexperienced enough to scare away the core Democrats that are essential to a 2008 victory. Hilary could be derailed with a major scandal but it seems unlikely there are any big skeletons in the Clinton closet or we'd have seem them "outed" by now as the New Hampshire and Iowa primaries loom, perhaps within a few months.

The Republican field is still wide open in my opinion, though Mitt Romney would seem to be the likely winner of the Republican Primary. Giuliani is also a possibility but his record, quirky style, and personal baggage seem to me an overwhelming liability when competing against more mainstream Republican candidates. Thompson is more along the lines of the traditional Republican conservative but in this election that may actually be seen as a liability by moderate Republicans. Also, his young and beautiful wife, combined with recent sex scandals on the Republican side, could be a liability for a candidate who will have to play the "family values" card to be viable with the core Republican constituency, especially against Romney's squeaky cleanness. McCain has all but fallen victim to his combination of Iraq War support and several election gaffes. The media, once enamored with McCain's honest and freewheeling style, seems to have tired of him and this is almost a death sentence for a politician.

Republican Presidential Debate

MSNBC is hosting the first Republican debate at the Ronald Reagan Presidential Library in California. Here, as in the Democratic debate, many are watching the top candidates to see if they falter or shine. Romney, McCain, and Giuliani appear to be those most likely to continue in this race until the end based on current polls and the substantial cash they have accumulated so far.

Based on the performances after about an hour of this debate it seems to me there have been no "home runs" or even any great quotable moments.

McCain has made his usual strong case for continued support for the Iraq War, adding that in his view the war before now had been "mismanaged". Giuliani cleverly weaved a complex but reasonable answer to the abortion issue. Most of the candidates state they are opposed to abortion and Roe v. Wade but Giuliani stated that the courts should decide the issue and women should have the right to choose to have an abortion despite he is personal "opposed" to abortion.

The fast and furious format is entertaining but I think it fails to capture much of the depth of the thinking of these guys, which appears remarkably similar on many issues despite the fact that they are trying to distance themselves from the competition.

Who won the debate? Off the top I'd suggest that Giuliani and McCain presented themselves much as they have for some time and their supporters, and voters somewhat new to the race, will view them favorably. Romney appeared somewhat off balance, answering more generally, as if he's spent far less time contemplating these issues. However Romney's looks and presence may play well with voters - he's arguably the most "presidential looking" of the crowd and in our very superficial society this edge can go a long way.

Conclusion? McCain by a slight edge over Giuliani, with Ron Paul as the most focused and articulate of the bunch.

First Democratic Presidential Debate

I missed blogging the Democratic Debate but will return with comments. Who would have thought that the races would begin so early?