Clinton about to win Texas

Although the networks, cowed by exit polling errors in New Hampshire, are afraid to call Texas for Clinton it appears very clear she's the likely winner in Texas, Ohio, and Rhode Island with Obama winning Vermont.

Although one can reasonably question what relevance "win" has in a contest where delegates are propotioned according to vote rather than "all or nothing" as in many Republican races, media attention focuses so narrowly on "wins" that this is an important metric.

What is clear is what Tim Russert pointed out tonight on MSNBC - the race will continue for through the convention and seating of Michigan and Florida will be a very important issue, as will superdelegates.

Donna Brazille, a superdelegate and CNN analyst, seemed to make a FreudianEsque slip tonight when she suggested the superdelegates would lean to the candidate with the best chance of a Presidential win. Based on almost *every single poll*, this is Obama rather than Clinton.

It's mini-Super-Tuesday - have you won yet?

With Texas and Ohio on the line John McCain may lock up his nomination today, and certainly is well on the way to the Republican Nomination. A recent BBQ at his house had McCain sizing up some potential running mates, though it's not at all clear who he'll choose. Although Huckabee may be appealing to the right wing of the party it's not clear McCain would gain a lot of votes with Huckabee because conservatives are either going to vote McCain or sit out this election. A more likely strategy than to go for conservatives is probably to shift to the center and try to play the "liberal" card against the Democrats, painting Obama or Clinton as far left. This strategy worked very well for Richard Nixon vs George McGovern and to a lesser extent in Bush v Kerry in 2004, where the Democrats were painted as "unpatriotic" despite the fact both had served in active military where the opponent had not.

Marc Andreessen on Barack Obama

Internet legend and pioneer Marc Andreessen has some detailed and interesting observations about Barack Obama, who Marc, his wife, and a friend met with at some length a year or so ago.
http://blog.pmarca.com/2008/03/an-hour-and-a-h.html

As he notes himself Marc is not necessarily a political expert, though I don't think anybody can really hold that title. Andreessen is, without doubt, an extremely sharp and influential technology guy so his effective endorsement of Obama is yet another feather in Obama's cap, with tomorrow's Texas and Ohio outcomes looking like they may effectively be the *national* outcome.

FOX News on March 4: Hilary Clinton's Last Stand

Chris Wallace on FOX news today is calling Tuesday "Hilary Clinton's Last Stand" and although this is not entirely inappropriate it seems to be overly dramatic. The likeliest outcome for Tuesday will keep Clinton and Obama close in total delegates, and leave the complex issues of superdelegates and seating Michigan and Florida delegates squarely on the table. Ultimately party insiders are the most likely to have the key say in all this as they can convince large blocks of superdelegates to vote "for the party". The most likely beneficiary of a brokered deal is probably Obama who seems to have more popular support now as well as a much better chance of beating McCain. This last item is key, and will sway Party management to encourage Clinton to back out of this and annoint Obama, perhaps in exchange for the VP slot (doubful) or a key cabinet post (somewhat likely).

RealClearPolitics has a great summary of major polls over the past year that show the remarkable and recent Obama surge among Democratic voters:
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/us/democratic_presidential_nomination-191.html

The graph results seem to suggest that at about the time of Obama's strong Super Tuesday showing, Democrats stopped simply assuming Hilary Clinton would be the nominee and gave careful consideration to Obama who they found more appealing. Given Clinton's consistent showing in polls of some 47% probably Clinton simply didn't gain any converts, while Obama has pulled in the undecideds and shifted a few making him the presumptive nominee.

One of the many great challenges of the American Democracy process is the fact that in one sense it is the undecided voters that ultimately make the decisions. Because voting can't assign extra points for being better informed or caring "more" than your neighbor, votes all count equally (Democrat superdelegates aside!). Thus those who have only marginal interest in the outcome and are easily swayed by campaign tactics are a key voting block, and may ultimately hold the key to success in this presidential election.

The last Hiatus?

As the final big primaries approach Democrats Hilary Clinton and Barack Obama remain locked in a tight race, though many think that if Obama wins in two or even one of the three remaining big states he will effectively "earn" the nomination by making it very hard for Clinton to continue to claim she has more broad based support than Obama and very unlikely for her to exceed his popular vote totals.

Although Pennsylvania still appears likely to go to Clinton, Ohio is getting closer and Texas now appears to favor Obama.

March 4 will be a big day for both candidates. Big wins for Obama likely will mean the race is over, but more close races will probably keep Clinton in through the convention when a lot can happen quickly. For example if the Florida and Michigan delegates are seated, and if a majority of superdelegates switch to Clinton she could gain the nomination even after losing most of the states in the popular vote. Given the Democrats concerns in 2000 it's hard to know how all this will shake out. Disenfranchising voters has been a key Democratic criticism of Republicans yet this is exactly the penalty they extracted from Michigan and Florida for holding primaries early. On the other side of the coin is the fact that Superdelegates have far more voting power than regular people, leading many to consider this elitist politics.

McCain successfully lobbies himself out of a problem

The McCain Iseman scandal died as fast as it sprung to life with the New York Times making weak supporting gestures about the story in the face of an almost blanket McCain denial. I'm guessing there was a small amount of smoke here but no fire, and that if anything this episode helped galvanize support for McCain among the hard core conservatives who have shunned him until recently.

However, if recent polls are close to the truth, McCain is going to have a very tough time competing with Barack Obama. Most polls put Obama up by close to 10% in a faceoff with McCain, and in my view this number is likely to *increase* if Obama wins the Democratic nomination and Hilary Clinton supporters start to rally more strongly behind him.

Obama's Momentum into the final stretch

Although neither Obama or Clinton will have enough votes to win from the primary voting, most analysts reasonably suggest that if Obama wins Texas and Ohio he will effectively be the presumptive nominee.

More complicated are the scenarios where Clinton wins narrowly in the last three big states of TX, PA, and Ohio. This would leave Obama and Clinton with similar delegate totals and put the race firmly in the hands of the superdelegates as well as a possible change in the elimination of the Floridan and Michigan delegates from the process.

It appears increasingly unlikely that Florida and Michigan delegates will be included given the Obama momentum and also the polling indicating he's far more likely to beat McCain than Clinton. Democratic Party players want to win in 2008 far more than they want a particular candidate, so expect the party to rally around Obama if his March 4 performance is good. If not, expect more indecision as the wild workings of American politics move along.

Corruption in Politics is rare

I'm tired of hearing people talk so much about corruption in politics when it is really very rare. Few endeavors are held to as close a level of scrutiny as politics, and although there are many very minor abuses throughout the system, major corruption is very rare.

We want to find individuals at fault when it is our seriously flawed money-driven-political-marketing-pork-barrelling political nightmare that is to blame.

The McCain non-scandal is a great example of how a personally virtuous person, acting reasonably, will still be viewed as engaging in questionable activity. Yet even as his personal actions appear to have been perfectly legal and reasonable, they reflect the deeper problems with the system where a cute young lobbyist is a lot more likely to get the ear of a Senator than a dedicated balding gadfly.

Contrary to what most people think there is almost NO voting in direct exchange for political contributions. However contributions play a huge role in the process and certainly distort it, but much earlier on. How? Only people who have the support of a broad section of special interest groups that can fund them have much of a chance at political success. Lobbies and money come in to play before the election, when candidates are picked for their views. Powerful lobbies do not change votes with campaign contributions, rather they change the *candidates* into those more likely to vote for them. It's more subtle than buying votes and perfectly legal, but reflects the key problem with the system which is NOT personal corruptibility, rather it is marketing and finance driven politics.

What is the solution? Public funding hardly seems the answer, though better forms of free public information may be helpful. The internet is already helping to level the playing field such that information can be disseminated at a fraction of the cost of other media.

Nader Enters the Race

Ralph Nader has entered the presidential race, though his effect this time will be trivial as Nader last much of his support during the 2000 Presidential campaign when many feel his 5% of the popular vote effectively threw the race to George Bush in his win over Al Gore. Gore won the popular vote handily but Florida's razor-thin vote margin eventually was decided in Bush's favor, giving him the electoral votes and win.

Personally, I've lost most of the respect I had for Nader feeling that his economic philosophy is more anti-corporate than it is pro-people. Corporate abuses - even in the past when they were arguably more flagrant - pale in comparison to the disadvantages people face if they cannot participate in the big corporate economy that drives our world. Roadblocks of the type Nader favors that put legislation and regulation in the way of corporate progress hurt the poor, because they raise prices on products and make it much harder for companies to deliver goods and services effectively. There is a minor safety advantage but it's trumped in most cases by the cost disadvantages.

I'm sure there are exceptions to this - where safety is worth the cost to the corporation - but I don't think Nader advocates for intelligent ROI analysis. Rather, like many people who are mathematically challenged, he simply won't address the huge costs to society of regulatory structures that inhibit innovation and profit.

McCain's non-scandalous scandal

The John McCain lobbyist scandal seems to be dying down in light of the New York Times' failure to produce anything other than rumors of the appearance of impropriety combined with McCain's sharp denial of any romantic involvement or betrayal of the public trust.

Frankly, I think the story's somewhat foolish original intention was not to accuse McCain of illegal or immoral activity, rather to suggest that even McCain is not immune to the lure of the huge gray areas in political ethics. These are challenges McCain has talked about times both in regard to his involvement in the Keating S&L scandal and challenges with our process in general.

McCain's case is interesting because I'd suggest it is pretty clear what happened, but media speculation and frenzy simply cannot handle middle ground very well:

McCain had a friendship with lobby girl which was flirtatious but probably not scandalous - I doubt they slept together and may never have had any romance, though I'm guessing he technically lied saying "no romantic involvement".

Like other Senators, McCain participated in our crappy lobby system in legal ways.

Vicki Iseman's influence over McCain him was a notch above the normal due to the flirtatious and/or romantic overtones, but she did not *directly* ask for favors and he did not *directly* offer them. McCain is a man of honor and it would have been totally out of character for him to act otherwise.

Isemant did get more attention than average, but nothing that would approach illegal preferential treatment or breach any reasonable ethical standards other than the one that suggests our current and past lobbying systems are poor ways to do the people's business.

Note that decisions and clients are on the record, so where is the record of corruption here?

Appearance of impropriety here? Sure, but that's not enough.

American Politics: Shame on us all

While issues go largely ignored in the media we've got politics center stage pretty much 24/7 now as personal attacks go overreported, indiscretions are speculatively addressed, and pundits spend most of their energies on irrelevant analyses of the horserace.

Shame on the big media.

It would not bring as many viewers, but it would be helpful to have a thoughtful examination of the various policy platforms of all the major candidates. The debates to their credit often address these issues of subtance, but the big media generally fails to follow up on the details or the implications of these platform differences. It's not really their fault, rather it is ours, becausa we don't want the complicated truth - we want the simple sexy nonsense.

Shame on us!

Lot is at stake in Texas Primary, March 4th.

The March 4 Texas primary was not expected to be all that significant in the early stages of the Democratic primary process, but it is now clear that Texas, Ohio, and Pennsylvania are close to "must win" states for Hillary Clinton. Clinton still leads the polls in all three although her Texas-sized lead in Texas has evaporated, leaving Obama and Clinton within a few percentage points in the Texas primary.

If Obama wins Texas it weakens Clinton's case even further that she is the best choice for the Democrat who can win in the general election. With most polls showing Obama as the stronger candidate against John McCain and many Democratics shifting from undecided to Obama, the Clinton Campaign arguably must sweep the 3 big states in a few weeks or start to prepare to conced the race to Obama.

Clinton to Obama: Kum-ba-ya dude, Kum-bay-ya

The Clinton Obama debate was almost as civil as the previous one, with the exception of a Clinton shot regarding Obama's use of one of his supporter's turn of phrase - a ridiculous accusation Clinton feebly tried to support only to be booed by the crowd. Yet Clinton also had the nights most appealing exchange where she called for party solidarity, expressed respect for Obama, and got the crowd to their feet.

Clearly, Democrats will be pleased with either of these candidates. What isn't clear is whether Obama might choose Clinton as VP if he wins. Clearly she'd be foolish not to choose him, creating a ticket that would likely be invincible against any McCain combination.

Huckabee's Hooters

MSNBC is reporting that Mike Huckabee's wife spent the night at Hooters Las Vegas after taking in some sort of boxing match or show. This is not news, but the headline was irresistable, and news worthiness hardly drives presidential politics. In fact one could argue that debates aside, the media has virtually no interest in issues - they are reporting the titillating nonsense that appeals to the prurient interests of our ill-informed American public. That would be you and me folks.

McCain Iseman New York Times .. Scandal...or not?

John McCain's candidacy may be threatened as what appears to be a fairly explosive revelation comes to light that he was romantically involved with lobbyist Vicki Iseman, a lobbyist who was representing companies that were affected by McCain legislation.

Details of the situation so far are not clear, though it seems more likely to me that the New York Times has left out unverified details than included spurious ones. That said, the story as written does not necessarily suggest anything other than bad judgement. I have seen nothing to suggest McCain treated Iseman's companies any differently, and in the game of power politics I think we tend to see corruption where it simply does not exist. Senators are hardly going to jeopardize their careers and reputations

Rush Limbaugh is absurdly suggesting this is some sort of left wing NYT conspiracy to endorse and then derail McCain. Limbaugh should have no credibility with anybody with an IQ above 70 - his snake oil politics and hypocrisy are so glaring it is a wonder anybody listens to his nonsense.

McCain and Vicki Iseman

A breaking story in the New York Times is suggesting that there may have been some form of inappropriate relationship between John McCain and a Lobbyist by the name of Vicki Iseman.

McCain's campaign seems to be handling this without denying the reports, rather suggesting that this is an inappropriate topic.

Based on the New York Times reports, McCain and Vicki Iseman developed a very comfortable relationship during her lobbying efforts several years ago. The Times suggests that McCain aids felt so strongly about the potential problems that they effectively broke up the two, who they feared were having a romantic relationship.

Unfortunately for Republicans, it is not going to be easy to gloss over this type of relationship given the powerful attacks against Bill Clinton for his many dalliances which led to Clinton misleading legal authorities and impeachment proceedings which failed to remove Clinton from office but created one of the great political crises in recent history.

Who is Vicki Iseman? See her bio here

Obama wins Wisconsin and Hawaii. TEN primaries in a row. Check please?

The Barack Obama juggernaut moves on with clear wins tonight in Wisconsin and Hawaii, leaving little doubt that Obama is the clear Frontrunner in the democratic race. Polls which only a month ago were strongly in Clinton's favor are evening up and the Wisconsin and Hawaii results are likely to keep the pressure on as young voters and *men* swell the Obama campaign ranks.

The male vote appears to be an important factor in the Clinton Obama race, where men appear to have concerns about a woman in charge. However I think a key factor that is now clear is simply that Obama proved himself viable as a Democratic candidate, and electable in the national race against the Republican contender. Democrats have been conflicted about Hillary Clinton for some time, and Obama appears to be their way "out" of that conflict.

All that said the

Pundits and Plagiarism: Shut UP!

As the USA enters an era of challenged prosperity, wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, global responsibilities that are greater than at any other time in history, and many challenges here at home....

The pundits are talking about whether Barack Obama copied a few words from his friend in a speech.

This is *complete* nonsense and although I don't blame the Clinton campaign for cleverly misdirecting everybody into this absurd issue, I *totally* blame Brian Williams, Tim Russert, Chris Mathews, and more and more for buying into this absurdity. This absurdity simply should not make the news, but like other mildly contentious stupid points it trumps real issues - really the *only* thing these clowns should be reporting.

What is wrong with TV news people? They rarely choose to report anything but items of entertainment value and the horserace details. Wouldn't it be refreshing to hear some intelligent discussion of policies? Is that too much to ask?

Clinton still leading in several upcoming primaries

Many polls continue to show Clinton ahead in Texas, Pennsylvania, and Ohio as the Democratic Primary continues in a virtual delegate dead heat between Obama and Clinton. Most polls are showing Obama with a lead in Wisconsin and Hawaii today. Wins in those states will demonstrate even more clearly how powerfully the Obama campaign has emerged as the front running campaign.

Today's absurd accusations from the Clinton campaign about speech plagiarism by Obama appear to be a strange way to score negative attention points during this critical time, and are likely to blow over tomorrow during the Wisconsin and Hawaii primary reporting frenzy.

On, Wisconsin!

Primary eyes are on Wisconsin this week as that "all American" state votes for the Democratic nominee. While McCain has only the finishing touches to put on his nomination, the Democratic race is very likely to go to convention, and the outcome there is not at all clear.

Obama has run a virtually flawless campaign, rising from near political obscurity to the be new national favorite and arguably the most likely winner of the big prize - the Presidency of the USA.

Presidential heir apparent Hilary Clinton is now locked in the tightest of races with Obama - a race that ultimately could hinge on how she manages issues such as inclusion of Florida and Michigan delegates, states banned by the Democratic national committee for holding early primaries, and superdelegates, most of whom remain uncommitted.

My take on superdelegates is that they will *not* necessarily help Clinton even though she currently has more of them pledged to her, though last week it was reported that she has lost 3 superdelegates during a time where Obama has won 13.

I think the most likely outcome at the convention is that many superdelegates will agree to support the person with the most popular votes and this will give that person a strong lead. Of course there could even be debate about who won the most votes as the Florida and Michigan voting legitimacy is debated.

Campaign Hiatus

It feels odd, but nice, not to hear the overwhelming and excessive coverage of the primaries for these few days between the last set of primaries and Wisconsin coming up in three days. Washington is voting as well but most of the delegates are distributed there via the caucusing which is completed already.



The superdelegate issue now takes front stage as it is extremely unlikely that either Obama or Clinton will go to the convention with enough votes to win. Many superdelegates appears to be holding off on committment, partly because they probably want to go with the winner, and partly because they are concerned about their own political reputations if they pick people that were not in favor in their own district or election territory. Superdelegates are about 20% of the total.



At this stage of the game it appears unlikely that we'll see superdelegates *overturn* the verdict of the popular vote. If Obama continues to perform in future primaries as he has in the last 8 primaries, his vote and delegate totals would be high enough to make if very hard for Clinton to convince superdelegates to vote for her as well as hard to justify a superdelegate win. A more likely scenario however is that Clinton will win in Texas, Pennsylvania, and Ohio, making the total delegate count *so close* that the party will need to do some soul searching to determine how to avoid contention at the Democratic convention.

Democratic Superdelegates

It's now very clear that Clinton Obama is likely to go to a convention for decision, perhaps making superdelegate voting the key to the nomination. CNN reported this morning that without *huge* winning margins for one candidate, neither can clinch this nomination without superdelegate votes.

So, how will this shake out? I'm guessing most of the superdelegates are waiting to jump on board with the winner of the popular voting, which may be just as well. If the "popular" nomination is overturned by insiders many will be angry, though I continue to think the most likely scenario is Clinton/Obama, a combination that may be dictated at the party level during the convention.

Delegates

McCain has all but sewn up the nomination, even before his impressive win in Virginia that should prove Mike Huckabee is simply not viable as any threat to the McCain Campaign. In fact the best strategy for Huckabee now is to suck up to McCain in the hopes of a VP nomination that is less likely to be forthcoming if he simply gums up the works and makes McCain look bad. That said, he's clearly hoping to have some leverage at the convention with enough delegates to be able to secure a VP spot. This appears less likely after yesterday's loss in Virginia.

What about Ron Paul? Arguably the most passionate and articulate spokesperson of the values Republicans claim to hold dear remains in the race, but with too little support to make much of a difference. His internet popularity was very interesting but failed to turn his campaign into the powerful force that Huckabee's became. I think Paul actually had more money initially than Huckabee and may still be pulling in more donations.

You call that negative?

The term "negative campaigning" should be reserved to mean the nasty, mean spirited, or misleading stuff that has become so common in American politics. Here, CNN calls a Hilary Clinton Wisonsin campaign commercial "negative" when all it does is goad Obama for refusing a debate, which he has done because stratically it is wise for him to do so and for Clinton, generally a better debater, to try to bring on more debates. This is not exactly the type of thing we saw back in the elections of the 1800s where candidates took outrageous shots at their opponents.

We can have a spirited, healthy interactions free from the media-induced nonsense that tends to color everything in the most confrontational light.

McCain Train Gets a Head of Steam

John McCain's strong campaign remains challenged a bit by Huckabee, but after today's strong showing in Virginia and the "Potomac Primaries", he remains the clear leader. The key question that remains on the Republican side of the presidential equation is whether McCain will pick Mike Huckabee as running mate or try to choose a moderate who can help him win in the states that have moderate political bases. I doubt McCain knows what he'll do yet because it is still not clear how conservatives will treat his candidacy.

Obama Keeps on Rolling

Barack Obama won the Virginia Democratic Primary and all the other primaries today, making him undefeated since February 5's close Super Tuesday results. Although this was expected it's another boost to Obama's roaring campaign.

Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas are big primaries and although all are currently polling for Clinton, I think Obama's campaign machine in full gear will be formidable when he starts speaking more in those states. His "Rock Star" quality, combined with the ability to talk inspirationally but very vaguely about policies, arguably make Obama the front runner now. Totals are not in yet but I think he'll be pulling just ahead of clinton in delegates after today, even with superdelegates included.

Obama extremely likely to take the delegate lead after today's results

Polls show Obama with a large lead in Virginia. After the Virginia Vote is in tonight, and even with Clinton's superdelegate advantage, Obama is likely to have the higher delegate total though regardless of today's result Clinton and Obama will remain within dozens of delgates of each other.

Pennsylvania, Texas, and Ohio's importance are increasingly with each passing Obama victory. Most see all three of these big states as likely to go for Clinton. Some of last month's Ohio polls had Clinton more than 20 points over Obama, though recent Obama victories could change all that.

However, based on all the information available to date we are still predicting a narrow Clinton victory - probably at the convention - and probably with the announcement of Obama as Clinton's VP. This would be the killer combination for the democrats and likely make them virtually unstoppable in the general election against McCain and his likely running mate, Huckabee.

Stay tuned...

Democratic Convention: Superdelegates and Excluded States

As Clinton and Obama vie for the Democratic Prize the likelihood that two factors the democrats will find uncomfortable may come into play in the decision. Superdelegates are one factor -they represent about 20% of the delegate total in a handful of influential party players. Here is a Superdelegate running total. With most still uncommitted, I think it's increasingly unlikely that we'll see these superdelegates make the difference. The issue is becoming controversial enough that most will stay uncommitted until a concensus position develops - perhaps as late as the convention but if Obama continues to rule the primary roost look for many superdelegates to shift to his camp. Clinton is far more vulnerable to claims of playing insider hardball than Obama, so ironically the superdelegate issue may wind up working to his advantage. He can claim a Clinton superdelegate lead is from party politicking where his superdelegate gains are legitimate.

I think a more important factor could be the inclusion of the results of the Florida and Michigan primaries. These both went to Clinton and would swing the delegate total even more strongly in her favor. In fact if Clinton takes New York and Pennsyvania the count should stay close right up to the convention.

Big Mo for Obama?

Does Obama have so much momentum now that Clinton cannot stop him from winning? Bill Kristol suggests today that Obama's recent victory sweeps will propel his campaign to have a clear delegate lead soon.

It is certainly clear that Obama, unlike Clinton, has captured the imaginations of many young voters as well as many mainstream Democrats. Where Clinton offers capability, experience, and the first serious female candidate to run for President, Obama offers the same affirmative action advantages to the democrats but also inspires confidence and enthusiasm. Historically the people that win are not the smartest and most capable - they are those with leadership qualities. Obama's superb speaking style, which combines power and humility, gives him leadership points that simply do not match Hilary Clinton's persona.

With many Obama wins in caucus states where a few can influence many, it's not clear Obama can translate his appeal to the big audiences of Ohio and Pennsylvania. California went to Clinton and this is a strong indication that in populous states Clinton still has the edge. Will this be enough to win? No. The decision is now very likely to be made at the convention, and increasingly it looks like the superdelegates issue could make all the difference.

Ladies and Gentlemen, Dems will have a convention!

Although it's not clear yet that the Democratic nomination will require a series of convention votes this is looking more likely as Barack Obama storms ahead with excellent showings in states that just a month ago looked like they were leaning to Hilary Clinton. The pundit talk has moved to superdelegates - the 20% factor in the Democratic nomination that can swing things away from the popular vote. I'm now thinking that many superdelegates may remain uncommitted through the convention in an effort to 1) boost their own importance and 2) help the national committee if it needs to balance off superdelegates to even up the score. It may prove wise for the Dems to either vote to NOT count superdelegates to avoid a populist backlash if the nominee was not chosen by the popular vote, rather by schmoozing the right party insiders. Clinton would be the one more likely to win in this fashion and it's hard to make a case in favor of this voting style given the 2000 election where GW Bush won without the popular vote, much to the dismay and outrage of Democrats.

It's all about the O...Obama

Barack Obama swept today's Democratic primaries winning in WA, LA, and Nebraska. Although this was expected it's another boost to Obama's campaign train, and the size of the victories was great enough that he's got powerful bragging rights tomorrow.

Although Clinton is still expected to take Pennsyvania and Ohio, huge states with large numbers of delegates, it's looking more and more like the election could hinge on the superdelegates.

Huckabee wins again

As everybody discusses the inevitability of a McCain win on the Republican Primaries Mike Huckabee just keeps on ticking, today winning the Kansas primary handily. With a few more wins like this in areas clearly out of the Southland, Huckabee is likely to land his ticket to the Vice Presidency.

Clinton Obama vs McCain Huckabee would provide Americans with intriguing choices as McCain and Clinton are both moderates in their parties where Huckabee and Obama are right and left wing respectively. I think in this case the VP debates would be very fun to watch.

Delegate Count before today's Feb 9 primaries: Clinton by a nose but only because of superdeletgates

RealClearPolitics.com is counting the Democrat delegates and boy are they close. Clinton holds a very slight lead *if you include the superdelegates*, Obama leads with popular vote delegates. I'm sure Howard Dean and other party leaders are dreading the possibility that superdelegates could make the difference in the winner, throwing the party

On Tim Russert David Brooks suggested that Clinton has the edge because the remaining states have lower education levels and he suggests that slightly favors Clinton, and also that Superdelegates may make the difference.

A paper obtained from the Obama Campaign by Russert had these totals *before* the superdelegates come into play:

Obama: 1806
Clinton: 1789

Wow, that's CLOSE!

Race and Voting

John McCain has all but locked up the Republican nomination but the democrats appear to have months to go before the decision is made.

I'm really surprised by the Obama surge but I think on the Dem side you now have legions of very enthusiastic new voters pitted against the old Democratic guard who tend to want Clinton. There are also specific demographic factors that have become very important, and contrary to much mainstream foolishness on race issues it appears that: There does appear to be racism, but it's not coming from mainstream white America. Exit polling data indicates that Latino voters may be voting for Clinton in some part because of race, though it's hard to tease out that factor in most polls.

We also see that African Americans are voting in huge percentages for Obama. Is this race based voting? It's hard to argue it is not when you have, say 80%+ when the candidates have effectively identical policies with respect to issues that surround race.

We probably won't know until after the primaries are over and somebody takes a good look at exit polling questions about race, but I'd guess that even though there is some race based voting it won't be the key factor in this race, partly because the two groups that appear to be most sensitive to race issues - Latinos and African Americans - each represent about the same percentage of the population and appear to have different ideas about who to support.

Freakonomics: Your vote won't matter

Freakonomics brings a lot of clarity to the math of voting with a great post noting that as elections get closer the decision is less likely to be made on the basis of the vote totals, rather it'll be handled by external parties. GW Bush's win in 2000 for example, and the fact Superdelegates may determine the Democratic primary outcome in 2008.

Romney Out, McCain to take the nomination

Mitt Romney has bowed out of the Republican Primary, making it almost certain that John McCain will be the Republican nominee. Interestingly this means McCain will not need to negotiate with Mike Huckabee for his delegates at a brokered convention as he is very likely to have enough delegates to win outright.

Although some strategists have suggested McCain may pick Huckabee as a running mate this seems unlikely because McCain is very likely to win most southern states anyway, and appears likely to choose a moderate Republican running mate in an effort to have a shot at capturing Ohio, Florida, and other key states in the general election.

Only Ron Paul, Mike Huckabee, and John McCain remain in the Republican primary with McCain far ahead in delegate count and overall support.

Missouri for Obama - unless you are AP

AP made a bad call on Missouri last night but otherwise the exit polling held up well. I was pissed in fact that they don't share this like they used to. When I saw the CA exit poll data from CNN, which very oddly leaves off the key total indicating the winner but include the female and male components and population percentages which should give you a good "exit poll winner" after a couple of math hoops and the assumption that males and females are voting in proportion to their state population.....hmm... but is this reasonable assumption?

I think folks make way too much of the challenges of exit polling. In general exit polling is good, but sometimes it is not. In 2000 the exit polling for Florida was fine - people *thought* they'd voted for Gore when in fact many ballots were spoiled due to double vote for Buchanon and Gore. This spoiled butterfly ballot factor clearly lost the race for Gore (crystal clear by the way if you missed the later analysis) even though it was not contested by him in the infamous Supreme Court decision which actually did not make a difference in the outcome.

So -Exit polls are good, but not always correct. Welcome to math.

Clinton to Win CA - Exit polls

Despite a powerful showing in other states by Barack Obama, Hilary Clinton appears poised to win the California Primary, tonight's big prize in the Democratic Primary Contest.

Exit polls make it clear she's got the race and with 15% of the vote in she's way up:
http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2008/primaries/results/state/#CA

Democratic primary math

RealclearPolitics has great coverage of the campaign math. Although it's a simplification, the delegate counts for the top big states at 11pm EST assuming current % stay the same and proportionality is the same as the main voting percentages (VERY approximate here!)

Obama Clinton
CA
NY 88 137
IL 101 49
GA 63 34
NJ 46 56
MA 36 55
-----------------------
334 331

Wow, that's close!

Clinton v Obama - how will California Vote?

Super Tuesday may end with no clear Democratic winner. Clinton and Obama are trading victories in several Eastern states. Only 5 states have more than 100 delegates at stake (CA, NY, IL, GA, NJ), and since they are proportional in most cases you need to win big to reap a big delegate advantage.

Clinton won New York, Obama Illinois, Obama Georgia, and Clinton NJ. The big California prize is still up for grabs with those polls closing in about ten minutes, at 8pm PST.

McCain looking very strong for Republicans

As Super Tuesday results pour in McCain is looking like the likely republican winner. Huckabee is strongly positioned to win 6+ states, and whether this hurt Romney or not will be debated for some time in the Republican party. Most likely scenario right now? McCain Huckabee ticket in the fall.

Huckabee wins West Virginia

In perhaps a sign of the demise of Romney, Mike Huckabee just won the WV primary and many delegates in that conservative state. A rumor suggested that McCain supporters went to Huckabee

David Brooks suggested today on MSNBC that the data is not really suggesting that Huckabee is a Romney spoiler, noting that for Huckabee supporters McCain tends to be the second choice. The WV results support this notion.

Super ... Tuesday ... is here!

Super Tuesday has arrived and the pundits are notably ... quiet with respect to all but obvious predictions. Some pundits are not even calling this for McCain who appears, based on polling, very likely to be today's big winner as he is likely to lock up the Republican nomination today. Some conservatives are suggesting that Huckabee will be the spoiler in this for Romney in that most Huckabee support would have gone to Romney in a two way race. The fourth contender, Ron Paul, is popular online but shows little support in the national polls.

The Democrat race appears closer as many polls show Obama and Clinton in a "dead heat" nationally going into the race. However the edge would still be for Clinton since she has more superdelegate supporters, and in the Democratic race they form some 20% of the delegate total.

On Charlie Rose last night Harold Ford, chairman of the Democratic National Committee, suggested that it could be trouble for the Democrats if they don't pick a nominee today. He suggested that continued primary "fighting" could lead to an erosion of support in the face of a unified Republican effort.

Maine goes for Romney

The Maine Republican Caucuses were today and Mitt Romney is the big winner with about 52% of the vote after 57% of the precincts have reported.

The media attention has focused now almost entirely on Tuesday's mega primary event and the national polls, where McCain and Clinton appear to have the election won. However few are ready to totally count out Romney or Obama.

Hey, it's sort of like the Superbowl. Patriots looking like the winners, but nobody wants to bet their life on it.

Clinton, McCain, Romney, Obama vie for the big prize

It is not clear that Tuesday's mega election event will bring clear primary winners but certainly it'll bring a lot of excitement to the US Presidential campaign.

Most pundits are predicting a McCain win for the Republicans but many won't pick a winner in the Clinton Obama race, which polls indicate may be tightening over this last week. Obama took in a spectacular 30+ million dollars in January. Only McCain appears somewhat strapped for cash as we head into the time when candidates are spending millions every day to spread their word to a national audience. I'm guessing Romney will have a superbowl ad and perhaps others as well, though even massive TV time seems unlikely to have a huge impact this late in the game. That said, many voters make up their mind in the last days or even minutes of the election. In that case it would not hurt to have made a positive impact on Sunday.

Arnold Schwarzenegger will endorse John McCain

Popular California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will endorse John McCain, probably this week. This comes at a critical time in the Republican primary and with only Romney and McCain left as serious candidates. Although Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee remain in the race neither of them is polling at anything like the levels of McCain and Romney, or can run enough ads to turn things around in time for "Super Tuesday" when many states will cast votes.

Despite what most felt was a strong debate performance last night, Romney's chances appear to be dimming as John McCain scoops up more prominent endorsments. There is some confusion right now as to Romney's campaign spending plans - some reports suggest he'll have a major media push in California and perhaps nationally but others say his national spend will be modest, perhaps an acknowledgement that McCain is looking like the likely nominee.

Arnold Schwarzenegger will endorse John McCain

Popular California Governor Arnold Schwarzenegger will endorse John McCain, probably this week. This comes at a critical time in the Republican primary and with only Romney and McCain left as serious candidates. Although Ron Paul and Mike Huckabee remain in the race neither of them is polling at anything like the levels of McCain and Romney, or can run enough ads to turn things around in time for "Super Tuesday" when many states will cast votes.

Despite what most felt was a strong debate performance last night, Romney's chances appear to be dimming as John McCain scoops up more prominent endorsments. There is some confusion right now as to Romney's campaign spending plans - some reports suggest he'll have a major media push in California and perhaps nationally but others say his national spend will be modest, perhaps an acknowledgement that McCain is looking like the likely nominee.
Schwarzenegger

Twitter the President? Nope.

Tech President wonders if Twitter could be the breakout technology for the 2008 Election.

Ummm - no. No way. Twitter has far too few participants to matter in a national election. Sure it should be part of a social media strategy - probably more so than the weak current usage I've seen from several campaigns using proxys to submit for their candidates as twitterees, but only Myspace and Facebook have the huge national reach that would make them worth a lot of attention by a candidate.

Is Nader Nuts?

Ralph Nader:

John Edwards, the banner of Democratic Party populism, is dropping out, and Dennis Kucinich dropped out earlier, so in terms of voters who are at least interested in having major areas of injustice, depravations, and solutions discussed in a presidential campaign, they might be interested in my exploratory effort...

I'd suggest there is no way Nader could even reach the pitiful support levels of Dennis Kucinich, and Nader's bizarre notion that he can is yet another indication of his failing mental coherence and relevance to the national political scene.

Nader is correct that the old style populism embraced by Edwards and pseudo-socialist economics embraced by Kucinich match Nader's odd worldview, but I don't think Nader understands the degree to which his former support base has eroded, and also the strategic errors he made by failing to negotiate a deal with Al Gore - a deal that would have made Gore the president in 2000 and could have given Nader huge influence in certain areas.

John Edwards drops out of Democratic Primary

In a move that has surprised many pundits, John Edwards has dropped out of the democratic race. In New Orleans he said that Obama and Clinton had both pledged to make ending poverty a key cause of their campaigns:

"they will make ending poverty central to their campaign for the presidency."
"This is the cause of my life and I now have their commitment to engage in this cause,"

It's not clear how much Edwards support will flow to Clinton and Obama though the next set of tracking polls should be very interesting. I'd wildly guess it'll split about equally between Clinton and Obama.

Dick Morris was suggesting that the Florida results indicated Obama is moving up fast on Clinton, citing the fact that those who made a last minute decision were split between the two where earlier deciders went for Clinton. I'm not clear he's got the math right on this however, since this tell us something about "last minute deciders" rather than about the broader electorate. He felt this was like a tracking poll trending strongly in Obama's favor, but I think that is not mathematically sound reasoning.

McCain Wins Florida by 5%

John McCain soundly beat second place Mitt Romney in Florida, winning 36% of the vote in that key Republican primary. Giuliani will now drop out and endorse McCain.

Clinton "won" Florida as well for the democrats, but the delegates there currently are not eligible to participate at the national convention though many suggest they eventually will be allowed. In fact this could become a key point if the race gets close. A supreme irony would be a democratic convention where the Florida delegate ruling would determine the outcome.

Heading into mega primary Tuesday we find the Democrats and Republicans in two fairly close races between Clinton and Obama and McCain and Romney. Although I'm not nearly as confident as before I still think Clinton will win after a strong Tuesday showing. I'm not nearly as confident about a Romney victory - something seemed to derail his upward trend and it may simply be that McCain is a known quantity and that comforts voters.

Florida Primary: McCain vs Romney will be close

Most pundits are predicting a McCain win for Florida. I have not followed this one very close but my gut says that Romney will win and by a decent margin. Why? New Hampshire's polling fiasco suggest there may be a hidden voting block that does not participate in the polls but does participate in the elections. If Clinton's surprise NH victory is any indication this block could be "Senior Women" who are a large block that votes religiously. Who will senior Republican women support in Florida? Maybe McCain because he's an appealing character, but I think they'll vote disproportionately for the young, vigorous, and handsome Romney who appears far more "Presidential" and in command than McCain, who is older than many voters.

But I would not bet on this outcome....too many variables in play.

Betting on the President

Intrade is an actual gambling venue where you can bet on the various candidates to win primaries and the general election. It these gamblers are right, we'll see a McCain v Clinton General Election in the fall. At Intrade, both Obama and Romney only have about a third of the betting action chance to win their respective primaries.

Intrade odds on the 2008 elections

Superdelegates are almost 20% of the vote in Democratic primary.

Underreported in the mainstream media is the significant role played by Democratic "superdelegates" in the primary process. 20% of the delegates at the convention are superdelegates. A list of these delegates along with their endorsements so far is HERE. Considering Clinton's large lead in the polls her clear superdelegate lead is also very significant. In fact one could argue that the superdelegate approach - by design - helps give a significant edge to political insiders like Hilary Clinton.

Clinton v Obama on February 5th. Mainstream media analysis has gone from worthless to opportunistic.

President Picker still thinks Hilary Clinton will be the nominee of the Democrats, and that the victory will be clear next Tuesday after the national primaries. Obama's speeches are both inspired and we think he's credible, but several factors continue to favor Clinton:

Polling shows Clinton with substantial voting leads almost across the board. RealClearPolitics.com has the best polling coverage and Clinton looks fairly solid. It'll be interesting to see how the Kennedy endorsement of Obama today affects the tracking polls tomorrow, but I'm guessing this was a media event that'll have little national impact on Obama's poll numbers.

So why does the media keep gushing over relatively insignificant events and aspects of the race? Because they LOVE a horserace, and they've helped make one happen by overstating Obama's chances, overstating Bill Clinton's positive and negative influences, and overstating the tensions in what has been a remarkably civil and dignified campaign.

With several exceptions such as the always frank and honest Pat Buchanon, many Republican analysts appear to me to be nothing short of deceptive with their glowing pseudo-endorsements of Obama, hoping to either create a weaker opponent for their Republican preference or (more likely) begin the tear-down of Hilary Clinton as early as possible.

Predictions? As always we are happy to give them. Clinton will consolidate here position and effectively win the democratic primary next week. Romney and McCain will remain close and that race will go down to the wire, perhaps depending on last minute negative campaign tactics, and probably going to the Republican convenion for a winner.

Look for Clinton to win very graciously and bring Obama on as her VP nominee quickly, consolidating the votes of two key groups in the general election: Women and African Americans.

Kennedy Endorses Obama

Ted Kennedy has endorsed Barack Obama. Although most of the media, almost gushing over the announcement, suggests this is a very positive development for the Obama campaign, I think that on balance this may not bode well for Obama.

First, the Kennedy endorsement consolidates Obama's position as the most liberal of the two key players. Yet he was already very popular among the most liberal factions of the Democratic party. Strategically, how will this endorsement affect the votes of the suburban soccer moms and moderate Democrats? I'd suggest it will push them firmly into the Clinton camp. Also significant is that even if Obama wins the Democratic nomination it's clear that painting himself as a "left wing liberal" will not help in the general election. The Democrat is *almost certain* to get the liberal vote regardless of the candidate lineups on either the Democrat or Republican side. The key battleground in the election will be the undecided, indecisive middle of the road voters who I predict want to see balanced and moderate forces prevail. As GW Bush did in 2000, Obama has masterfully portrayed himself as a "reach across the aisle" candidate. Kennedy's endorsement will not lend much support to this assertion.

Obama wins big in South Carolina

Barack Obama crushed his two opponents in today's South Carolina primary, winning 55% of the vote over Hilary Clinton and John Edwards who had only 45% of the vote - combined. Although an Obama win was expected in South Carolina the size of the win was not. This huge percentage victory will inject a lot of enthusiasm and momentum into an already strong effort by the Obama campaign.

February 5th's massive primary day, where 22 states are in play, may not even be the decisive event now that the race is so close.

Kucinich out

Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich has dropped out of the race. Lackluster poll numbers combined with a recent legal confrontation with MSNBC which fought hard to keep Kucinich out of the recent Democratic Debate. The New York Times reports on that conflict, where MSNBC wanted to exclude Kucinich after earlier invites and Kucinich arguing that this was a breach of contract. Initially the ruling was in Kucinich's favor, but appeared at last minute to be overtuned by legal appeal.

This leaves the democratics with three candidates: Clinton, Edwards, and Obama. Although Clinton still leads nationally Obama is now poised to win Saturday's South Carolina debate which may edge him even closer to polling parity with Clinton as we move into what may prove to be the definitive day in the election: February 5.

Thompson out of Republican Primary

Fred Thompson has dropped out of the race after a weak showing in the South Carolina primary on Saturday behind John McCain and Mike Huckabee. This was a predictable development, especially given Thompson's lackluster attitude towards the race. It almost appeared as if his candidacy was mostly the result of pressure from friends rather than a passion Thompson had to win.

McCain poised to win South Carolina, Thompson to drop soon.

John McCain appears poised to win South Carolina as early returns have McCain leading Huckabee with some 38% of the So. Carolina vote.

This should be seen as very encouraging for the McCain campaign given the conservatism of this state. If Huckabee can't win in So. Carolina it's an indication that his early Iowa victory was more from good strategy than hidden high levels of national support.

Thompson appears in line for a 4th place showing behind Romney, which will almost certainly lead to him dropping out of the race by tomorrow.

Note that the Democratic primary in So. Carolina is *next* Saturday.

Romney, Clinton in Nevada

Mitt Romney and Hilary Clinton are the Nevada Caucus winners. This is something of a surprise victory for Clinton who effectively lost a court battle to keep the cuacuses out of the Casinos, where Obama appeared to have a strong edge given his endorsement by the powerful Culinary Workers Union.

South Carolina Returns are now coming in with McCain and Huckabee close.

Duncan Hunter has dropped out, and I expect Thompson to drop by tomorrow morning after what appears to be a poor showing in South Carolina.

Casino Caucusing to go forward in Nevada Primary

The court has ruled that Caucusing will be allowed in Casinos as originally planned for the Nevada democratic primary, giving Barack Obama a huge boost in his effort to win that state. The Teachers Union has challenged the decision on the grounds that it was not fair to give Casino workers such easy access away from their districts while other workers won't have the same benefit, but the court has rejected that argument.

Look for Obama to win Nevada given his endorsement by the Culinary Workers union, a major political force in the state and in the key city of Las Vegas.

Romney wins Michigan

Mitt Romney has won the Michigan primary handily, giving him a victory many saw as essential to keeping a strong candidacy alive. McCain ran second with about 30% to Romney's 39%.

The mixed results of the initial primaries are leaving the Republican nomination up for grabs, with Huckabee, Romney, McCain, and Giuliani all considered strong possible contenders. Even Thompson, with a strong South Carolina primary showing, could see a campaign surge though Thompson appears a very long shot at this point.

President Picker still thinks Romney has the edge due to superficial appearance issues and, most importantly, cash on hand, which for Romney is effectively his own bank on which he can draw as needed. That said it seems evangelical voters have been reluctant to embrace Romney and McCain's straight talk has charged his campaign, so it's anybody's race now.

Michigan results shortly. Kucinich may debate after all.

The Michigan primary results will be in shortly. For the Dems this is almost a non-event due to national party penalties which are not going to count Michigan votes. Only Clinton is on the ballot, she will "win" handily, but get no delegates for the nomination.

The Republican Michigan vote is far more significant. Romney arguably must win the state of Michigan - where he and his wife grew up - to demonstrate his national viability. Polls show Romney and McCain in a close race.

Tonights Democratic Debate in Las Vegas was originally to feature Dennis Kucinich but poor showings were to leave him out. However a judge ruled today that Kucinich must either speak or the judge may order an injunction to stop the debate altogether. Look for Kucinich to be included at the last minute.

McCain leading Republicans in national primary polling

Polling problems have become a conspicuous feature of American politics, but generally they still are useful as predictors and John McCain's campaign must be thrilled with the latest reports from CNN which have McCain leading nationally by about 10 points over Mike Huckabee.

Part of the challenge with national polls is that they may be subject to a lot of simple "name recognition" bias - ie people are saying their favorite candidate is simply the one they've heard of. As the TV ads hit and the race heats up in the dozens of states with primaries coming up in a matter of weeks, we are likely to see a narrowing of the polling numbers in almost all races.

Tomorrow's Michigan vote will be a significant factor in the race, especially if McCain "steals" victory away from Romney. A Romney loss in Michigan could sound a death knell for his campaign which failed in Iowa and New Hampshire despite substantial effort and expense in those states.

Race and the Democratic Primary

The pundit ranting and media attention focusing on "race issues" in the Democratic primary seems extremely overhyped to me - almost a network fabrication to pique viewer interest and heat up a race where all three Democrats have similar platforms, voting records, and sensibilities.

Of course there are tiny little "swift boat" attacks every day by people who are associated with the campaigns in various ways, but on balance it is ridiculous to see this as a contentious campaign - the dialog for the most part has been very respectful and civil, reflecting the fact that the players are much more ideologically compatible than they are incompatible.

Tomorrow's Democratic debate should provide an excellent read on the state of the campaigns in terms of negativity and future direction. I expect a fiesty but respectful Obama and Clinton, with Edwards probably doing some Hilary bashing as he's clearly lining himself up with the "new kids on the block" rather than the Clinton old school.

Kerry's endorsement of Obama was intriguing given that he ran with John Edwards. Despite almost becoming president himself, Kerry no longer has much national political clout - perhaps another reflection on our "all or nothing" American political mentality.

It's a horserace!

As the primaries go to different players with no clear winners in sight the 2008 campaign is shaping up to be a close race in both parties as well as the general election.

Clinton's surprise win in New Hampshire raised more questions about polling validity as almost all polls showed Obama winning handily. McCain's strong showing in New Hampshire has revitalized his sagging campaign, suddenly focusing a lot of attention on Romney's
vulnerabilities.

Tomorrow's Michigan race could be a critical one for the Romney campaign. He's from Michigan where his father was a popular Governor. If McCain beats Romney in Michigan look for some major strategy changes by the Romney campaign, and perhaps even a drop out though I think that is very unlikely. Romney's personal wealth gives him a powerful financial backing that is lacking in the McCain, Giuliani, or Huckabee camps.

For the Dems, look for some lively debate tomorrow night as Edwards, Clinton, and Obama duke it out in Las Vegas in the first debate with only those three frontrunners.

New Hampshire Primary - will it change the game?

Light posting here because I'm at the consumer electronics show in Las Vegas right now, and posting a lot about that at JoeDuck.com.

However it's looking like Obama will win NH and pretty much inherit the Clinton "Frontrunner" mantle, providing a powerful buzz boost for the campaign as it enters the races that have many more delegates at stake. If Edwards takes second it'll be even a more serious blow to the Clinton Campaign. Look for Clinton to hire a new campaign manager...tomorrow. I predict Carville will come on board, and I predict he will turn things around. Is Edwards a contender? Of course - though he seems to face the challenges of being seen as something of a Washington "insider" like Clinton and lacks the superb speaking style and "shiny new" appeal of Obama.

On the Republican side McCain looks like the clear winner, with Romney again the bridesmaid where he hoped to be the bride. It appears many are souring on Romney, appearing to fear his polished style and perhaps his Mormon religious heritage. Could "Big Love" have sunk Romney before he even had a shot? It's fair to say the Republican field is even more open than the Democrats with McCain, Romney, Giuliani, and Huckabee all real contenders for the prize.

Biden, Dodd out

Joe Biden and Chris Dodd have dropped out after poor Iowa showings. Meanwhile Huckabee and Obama are the media toasts of the town, getting more buzz than even big advertising money can buy.

The New Hampshire results won't necessarily reflect the national opinion but unlike Iowa they'll include a lot more groups. If Obama and Huckabee do well in New Hamphire - which probably means second or strong third, they may come out as presumptive frontrunners although the race is likely to tighten after New Hampshire since it is unlikely to be nearly as friendly to Huckabee as Iowa's small and dedicated Christian lobby turned the tide there. Even for Obama it'll be tough to pull out a New Hampshire win.

But ultimately the race will be decided in February on super mega primary day when more than half of all the delegates will be awarded in the huge number of major races around the country - from New York to California. Any predictions before that time are pretty speculative, though we plan to make them anyway.

Next Presidential Battleground: New Hampshire

It's not yet clear how the Iowa results will affect the New Hampshire Primary but it's certain to have some effect. There's a tendency for people to jump on and off political bandwagons, so a good guess going in to New Hampshire is that Huckabee and Obama will improve their current showings, probably at the expense of Clinton and Romney.

It's also not clear how this will affect the national polls, which still show Clinton with a sizable lead and show Giuliani - not even a player in Iowa or New Hampshire - with the national Republican lead.

We were wrong about Iowa, so we won't be predicting anything for at least...24 hours!

Obama holding Iowa lead, CNN projects Obama Victory

CNN Projects Obama as winner in Iowa

With about 70% of the democratic precincts in Barack Obama appears the likely Democratic winner with 35% of the vote, with Edwards and Clinton tied at 32%.

A defeat for Clinton in Iowa will hurt her campaign and energize Obamas, though the quirky Iowa caucus process can quickly fade from memory and it is notable that few of the past Presidents actually won this state. Still, media attention is white hot this year and the Huckabee and Obama wins are likely to fuel a lot more attention and a lot more donation money.

Huckabee Wins Iowa

CNN projects Huckabee as Iowa Winner.

15% precincts have reported for Republicans. Huckabee appears to be showing a whopping 40% to Romney 20% from those precincts, though info is still coming in...

CNN Iowa entrance Polls: Tight Obama v Clinton and Romney v Huckabee. Edwards down

CNN Iowa entrance Polls: Tight Obama v Clinton and Romney v Huckabee. Edwards down.

CNN's got some great coverage tonight from *inside* five Iowa Democratic Caucus locations. there are some 3500 locations so it won't be very helpful in terms of prediction, but it's a great insight into the Iowa process, which is at one level very democratic and open yet at another level it is not very participatory (only a small fraction of the electorate participates) and also to my mind is very biased in favor of more assertive folks who are willing to stand up for their opinions. This last feature is very questionable, as it effectively may disenfranchise some " shy" folks, which is not democratic. The Republican system, a simple straw poll, is arguably more "fair" to all involved.

Huckabee's Surprise?

The Huckabee campaign is now predicting a 5%+ victory tonight in the Iowa Caucuses, as reported by Fox News' Shepard Smith a few moments ago. Fox suggests that the Huckabee Campaign has an exceptional rural religious get out the vote campaign that has been underreported so far during the campaign (though polls should have captured this data).

A close election on both Republican and Democratic sides probably will not shift the balances of power, but a runaway victory or loss by any candidate could do a lot to change the national polls.

This just in: Obama campaign is suggesting there are early indications of record, large turnouts. Most think this will hurt John Edwards and help Clinton and Obama with a *very* large turnout helping Obama the most.

Iowa Caucuses are Coming!

Tonight some 150.000 - 200,000 Iowans will gather at locations all across their state to choose the Democratic and Republican candidates as Iowa's recommendations for the national conventions. As the "jumping off point" for the Presidential Race Iowa's importance to the media is extraordinary - and many would say irrationally overblown by the media.

Some conventional wisdom holds that there are "three tickets out" of Iowa and this year probably won't be the exception to that on the Democratic side, where it's likely that Obama, Edwards, and Clinton will come out with enough support to make the next race - New Hampshire - the media's next darling.

Republican results will be complicated by the fact that Giuliani and McCain, both strong nationally, have made few attempts to do well in Iowa. I'd suggest that after Iowa we'll see the Republican field quickly narrow to Huckabee, Romney, McCain, and Giuliani with the first two as rising stars and the second two as falling stars. I still predict Romney will win the Republican nomination.

Based on the most recent polling averages I'm starting to doubt my own predictions of Romney and Clinton, but it's very hard to predict Caucus results based on polls because people must make a substantial committment to a caucus, especially on the Democratic side where you must also stand up and sometimes speak for your candidate.

Iowa Republicans: Huckabee on Tonight Show, Romney Rolling along

As we move into the final hours before the Iowa Caucuses the Republican interest is focusing in on Romney and Huckabee. The latest poll from the Desmoines newspaper shows Huckabee with a solid lead, though averaging several recent polls gives puts Romney and Huckabee in a virtual dead heat with Huckabee ahead by a fraction of a percent.

The Republican field is complicated by the fact that national frontrunner Giuliani skipped Iowa completely and John McCain has not compaigned very heard in Iowa - partly because his honest stand against foolish ethanol subsidies made it very hard for him to do much in Iowa. If Huckabee or Romney's campaigns show huge boosts after Iowa this "no Iowa" strategy may be seen as a mistake, but on balance I think this was a good choice for McCain and Giuliani. What is likely is that we'll see the Republican field narrow to three - maybe four candidates after New Hampshire next week. Those are likely to be Huckabee, Romney, McCain, Giuliani.

Huckabee's huge surge over the past few months is the most significant developement in the race. It appears to be a reflection of the desire on the part of many Christian conservative Republicans to have a candidate that strongly supports a pro-Christian, anti-abortion stand that is not seen in the other leading candidates. Money will come into play heavily for Huckabee as he moves to the larger states where campaigns cannot be run as personally as in Iowa, though a win in Iowa woult lead to a significant increase in donations.

Obama and Huckabee lead in large DesMoines Register Poll

The key newspaper in the upcoming Iowa race is the DesMoines Register. On CSPAN today Pollster J. Anne Selzer is discussing their latest poll, the last major one before the caucuses:

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=iowapoll07

Frustratingly in terms of predicting outcomes, their result is dramatically different from Zogby for the Democrats. Register shows Obama leading in a big way, Zogby shows Clinton with the lead. RealClearPolitics averaging process shows a very narrow Clinton lead.

On the Republican side they agree with Zogby and show a Huckabee lead. RealClearPolitics averages now show Huckabee with a sliver of a lead: 0.4% over Romney.

The Clinton and Edwards campaigns suggested the Register's methodology was flawed, especially in terms of projected caucus participation. Selzer thinks a lot of independents will be involved - many more than historically. She also notes that they were able to contact some potential voters by cell phone, most notable college students who will be back in time for caucus but are not in Iowa now - which she said was a flaw in some other polls.



So, how does this affect our Predictions? No change. Romney and Clinton will win Iowa.

Polls?!

As Mark noted below Huckabee is showing as the Iowa leader in the Zogby tracking poll as well as the averaged ClearPolitics polling here: http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/iowa-primary.html

The MSNBC poll they discussed today showing Romney in the lead is listed at ClearPolitics as Mason Dixon, but as I've noted before poll averaging is probably the best measure assuming all the polls in the average are unbiased. Averaging can fail miserably if you include polling that is not objective - e.g. polls by groups with an agenda or axe to grind. I have no reason to believe any of these fall into that category.

Huckabee's press conference today was the talk of the media at MSNBC who suggested he was trying to be negative without running the negative ad he'd planned. It'll be interesting to see whether Romney or Huckabee can master the art of being very negative *without acting like you are being negative*. Both are working hard at that during these last few days.

Some polls are showing Obama over Clinton where MSNBC had almost a dead heat. It'll be fun to try to untangle some of this data over the next few days, though our predictions remain as Clinton and Romney with Iowa Victories.

Michael Bloomberg to enter the Presidential race ! ?

New York Mayor Mike Bloomberg's staff has been preparing for a possible presidential run on a third party ticket. This could be a very significant development given the ambivalence towards the frontrunners in both parties. Bloomberg is a Democrat but as a billionaire businessman would also have appeal to many Republicans, so his effect on the ultimate outcome is hard to predict and, unlike Ross Perot, Bloomberg arguably has a higher quotient of personal+professional appeal than Clinton, Obama, Giuliani, or Romney.

President Picker is waiting for more information on the possible Bloomberg candidacy, but at the very least this is a potentially destabilizing development for both parties. If more than two fo the current frontrunners appear to falter without a surge by the competition, look for Bloomberg to jump in to the Presidential race as a third party candidate.

Hey, I bet Donny Deutsch knows if Bloomberg will run and I'm hoping to meet him at CES Las Vegas. Deutsch's masterful advertising expertise helped bring Bill Clinton to power, and clearly marketing is a key skill for a presidential team so it wouldn't surprise me if Donny's already been contacted by the Bloomberg staff for ideas and thoughts on the possibility of a Bloomberg run.

Romney leads Republicans in latest Iowa poll

Mitt Romney now shows as the likely winner in Iowa, four points up on Huckabee according to the latest MSNBC McClatchy poll some 4 days before the caucuses. For Republicans the polls are more relevant becuase the caucus process does not involve "speaking up" for your candidate or switching support as does the Democratic caucus procedure which is more likely to shake things up.

Iowa Democrats effectively tied

Well, despite what I noted earlier about the mistaken impressions about "statistical ties" the latest MSNBC poll shows Edwards 24%, Clinton 23%, and Obama 22%. This result is *so close* that even though if this was your only source you'd want to bet on Edwards, it now appears that Iowa Democrats are pretty much tied, especially given the fact that averaging of the polls - probably a more effective measure than any single poll - now will give Edwards a boost from this top showing.

President Picker still thinks Clinton will win due to the football game advantage and Bill Clinton master strategics that we think are not properly reflected in the polls, though I have not researched the polling questions. In fact if the polls *do* reflect some apathy all bets could be off in a very close race where you may see higher-than-anticipated participation and guys skipping the game to go support their candidate.

In fact one wonders if Richardson and Biden may be negotiating behind the scenes right now for a VP slot. They will each have caucus people who will need to "switch candidates" due to the 15% caucus support threshold. Thus if they asked their supporters at the last minute to move to any of the top three it could be enough to swing the result, and the stakes in Iowa are high enough for Obama, Clinton, and Edwards that any of them might agree.

Desmoines, Iowa - Presidential tourism in action

The Desmoines Register, which I think is Iowa's main newspaper, has a neat piece showcasing tourism in Desmoines where many of the campaigns have a rather large prescence, and the election mania is reaching it's peak as the presidential caucuses loom.

Iowa Republican Race: Romney vs Huckabee

Recent surges for Mike Huckabee make him a real contender in Iowa, and president picker now thinks Huckabee could even win Iowa although Romney will certainly be close. We continue to predict a Romney win in Iowa.

Recent polls show Romney and Huckabee neck and neck, each with about 30% in Iowa. McCain's weak Iowa showing reflects the problems with a system that puts so much emphasis on Iowa, where (stupid and foolish) heavy subsidies for Ethanol are popular. McCain, much to his credit, has opposed these subsidies and lost a lot of votes for doing that. McCain is now a frontrunner in New Hampshire - a state he won against GW Bush in the 2000 race.

Unlike the democratic caucus process Iowa's Republican race uses a ballot process, thus the polls are more relevant because people will not have to "stand up and argue" for their candidate as they do in the Democratic caucuses.

President Picker predicts that Huckabee's popularity will soon fade with a poor New Hampshire showing and increasingly public scrutiny.

President Picker Predictions: Look for a small Romney victory in Iowa and a McCain win in New Hampshire, Giuliani continues to fade as will Huckabee. McCain cash problems will hurt him in South Carolina. Thompson drops out after South Carolina or even New Hampshire.

Iowa Democrats - Clinton, Obama, Edwards almost a dead heat?

Real Clear Politics has a great examination of recent Iowa polling, and averages the latest information to get these numbers:

Clinton 28.4
Obama 26.4
Edwards 25.8

Averaging has some challenges but probably paints a better picture than any individual polling effort. By this measure the race is pretty much a dead heat (though I HATE ther terms "statistical dead heat" because it misleads people into thinking there is no difference between different numbers. There is a difference. When two numbers are within the polls margin of error it still means the top person is "more likely" to win, but suggests far more uncertainty than if the numbers are outside of the margin of error.

For example Richardson with under 10% has virtually no chance of an Iowa top 3 placement, but any of the top 3 could win this race.

However, I continue to believe Clinton will win due to superior organization and strategy and the football game which will affect men more than women and thus Clinton's popularity among Iowa women will be enhanced, but the game is not likely to be fully reflected in polls.

Prediction: Clinton Wins Iowa and also New Hampshire.

Into the Iowa Home Stretch

The Iowa Caucuses are only about a week away, and it is by no means clear who will win Iowa, let alone how that will affect the longer term prospects of the winners and losers.

On the Republican side of the race McCain is showing signs of life in Iowa and New Hampshire, and in National polls. If he topples the "front runners" Romney and Giuliani it'll breath some life into a campaign that had been slowed considerably by challenges in organization and funding.

Still, President Picker predicts a Romney win in Iowa by a modest percentage and then a stronger win in New Hampshire, consolidating Romney as the Republican Front Runner and seeing more drop outs - probably Thompson first after predicted bad showings in the first two states.

Democrats are also hard to call, but we think Obama's latest surge has been mostly a product of big spending and Oprah appearances and his hard core support may fade when push comes to shove comes to the complex caucus process. In fact I think it's possible we'll see Obama support higher in number than Clinton's but still a caucus loss due to inferior organization and strategy or even some last minute bombshells that will weaken Obama support.

Clinton has one of the great political masterminds of the 20th century on her team, and it's unlikely the Clinton campaign will botch their broad based Iowa support and organization. Likewise Edwards has been through this before with good results, so his organization may outperform his actual support.

Of course even the weather can play a huge role in Iowa, as will the football game which gives Clinton a nice edge demographically as she has more female voters and they are less likely to stay home and watch the game. Stormy? Clinton wins handily due to organization and football. Perfect Weather? Obama has a shot. Edwards....second.

In Memoriam: Benazir Bhutto

Benazir Bhutto, Pakistani moderate and champion of democracy, is yet another reminder of the instability in so many parts of our challenged world. Bhutto’s assassination, and the ongoing attacks on General Musharaff, bring that possibility closer as Pakistan’s hopes for a quality democracy drift again into the shadows.

India and Pakistan have been very antagonistic towards each other since Pakistan’s fiery birth soon after Indian independence from Britain. Disputes over the Kashmir region, claimed by both countries, flare up regularly.

Instability favors the extremists and those who support them, and takes us away from the democracy that most people favor as the best way to bring justice and prosperity to all.

Bhutto stood for democracy, and died for democracy. Even in our much safer society our prominent elected officials and candidates risk their lives in the pursuit of the democratic dream. We should respect them all for taking this risk in the name of our freedoms.

New Hampshire Concord Monitor Newspaper: Romney need not apply for President.

The Concord Monitor , in a rambling, scathing editorial written by "monitor staff", suggests that Mitt Romney is basically a "fake" and should not be President. The ranting critique of Romney seemed odd to me coming as it does from a liberal paper that one would think would be at least mildly supportive of Romney's history of mild Republicanism rather than the more right wing forms it claims (correctly) he's catering to as the campaign heats up. Almost bizarre is the Monitor's description of what they see as a litany of Romney defeciencies:

... athletic build, ramrod posture, Reaganesque hair, a charismatic speaking style and a crisp dark suit. You'd add a beautiful wife and family, a wildly successful business career and just enough executive government experience. You'd pour in some old GOP bromides - spending cuts and lower taxes ...

So let me get this straight Monitor staff: Republicans need a scrawny bald guy with bad posture in an ill-fitting light colored suit. He should speak poorly, have an ugly wife, and ugly children. He should have failed in business and have huge amounts of government experience, and favor more spending and higher taxes.

Huh?

Frankly, I think the editorial is more conspicuous than Romney's newfound conservatism, it reads more like a paper trying to derail the person who is arguably most likely to win the general election than as a real statement of the paper's sensibilities. Failing to disclose their likely preference for the Democratic nominee smells wrong to me given how critical they seem to be of Romney's "past liberalism"

C'mon Concord Monitor - Romney's conservative focus is like Hilary's hawkish sensibilities or Edwards populist ones. These are simply good campaign strategy - play your weaknesses as strengths and draw in people near the middle. Most of these candidates (Obama as possible exception), have legislative records we can examine and there is little reason they will diverge significantly from past voting.

Romney may or may not be suited for the job of president, but the Monitor's weak and self-serving editorial is hardly a guide to his qualifications or lack of them.

Giuliani released from MO hospital and is OK, Tancredo drops out of race.

Rudy Giuliani was hospitalized yesterday with flu-like symptoms. He's been released from the Missouri hospital and CNN is reporting he has a "clean bill of health", but they don't seem to have much information.

Although there is no reason to believe Giuliani's problems have anything to do with his past cancer, it's clear that health issues could impact this election more than most. John Edwards wife had cancer as did Giuliani, and it is reasonable to wonder what effect a health flare-up would have on these campaigns.

Tancredo leaves Republican field

Tom Tancredo, dead last in the polls, will drop out of the race today. It's not official yet but will happen during the press conference he'll hold before Thursday afternoon.

Tancredo's strong anti-illegal immigration message did not appear to resonate with voters.

Meanwhile, Republicans continue to vigorously court New Hampshire voters. Iowa is more a Democratic battleground although both states could provide a huge boost to winners in terms of support as well as the mother's milk of politics - cash.

Donny Deutsch on Christmas Ads

Advertising expert Donny Deutsch was hard on most of the Christmas campaign advertising, suggesting much of it is a waste of time or not really "on message" for the candidates.

I agreed with some of Deutsch's analyses but disagreed with his criticism of the Obama ad, which I'd argue is simply brilliant. Giuliani ridiculously offers off camera people fruitcakes and sits beside a fake santa. Edwards simply offers a short campaign pitch. Clinton is wrapping presents like "National Pre-K" and "Health Care". Not terrible, but smells insincere which is a key Clinton challenge.

The two "stand out" ads are that of Huckabee, which somewhat spookily features a shelf filmed to look like a cross behind the candidate - almost as if they are sending a secret signal to the minions waiting in the wings for a messianic candidate. Deutsch stopped just short of calling this ad out as a dangerous sign of trends in American politics, but indicated he was alarmed by this type of symbolism.

The great ad is Obama's. His picture perfect family sits beside a tree as Michelle wishes everybody well. Obama then suggests it's time to come together rather than apart, and his family almost frames this concept in a greeting card way with the daughters wishing us all happy holidays. Schmalzy? Maybe, but this ad is a brilliant example of reaching the people you want in the way they want to be reached. Obama needs women to vote for him, not Hilary. This is a huge challenge that his campaign is meeting masterfully with Oprah and ads like this.

Republican New Hampshire - Romney v McCain

Mitt Romney has a substantial lead in New Hampshire according to the NBC Wall Street Journal poll results discussed today on Chris Mathews Hardball. As we predicted some time ago Romney is the Republican to watch and the man to beat, as Giuliani's lead dwindles in the face of closer public scrutiny.

Likewise on the Democrat side Clinton maintains a sizable lead in New Hampshire although Obama now leads in Iowa 33% to 29% for Clinton.

President Picker is skeptical of the Iowa poll results showing an Obama lead. Although he may win, we still predict a Clinton Victory, feeling that support for Obama will prove "softer" than support for Clinton. Iowa Caucusing requires a substantial committment from supporters and it's not at all clear that Obama's new campaign troops will be as enthusiastic on caucus night as they have been attending Obama pep rallies with Oprah.

Yahoo Political Dashboard

Webguild reports that the The Yahoo Political Dashboard is up and running, though Reshma notes several caveats in how you'd want to interpret this data.

The Yahoo Dashboard is very nicely done visually, and allows a lot of key comparisons quickly. The money raised column may be the most relevant in terms of the prospects of these candidates as we kick the primary season into gear in early January. Why? Campaigning in small states like Iowa and New Hampshire is not expensive, but in California and New York you need tens of millions to sway those pesky undecided voters who arguably are the key voters who determine the outcome in our market-driven elections system.

The following candidates won't have money problems if they can perform OK in the early primaries: Clinton, Obama, Romney, Giuliani, Edwards. I'd say McCain and Huckabee are at great risk regardless of performance because they'll need cash to continue, and unless they have huge showing early on I predict people will try to "bet on a winner" and donations will continue to flow to the frontrunners. Look for Romney and Edwards to fund their own campaigns heavily if their prospects look good. President Picker still predicts that Romney will win the Republican Nomination and Clinton the Democrat, but we acknowledge the Iowa and New Hampshire races have become closer than we thought they would be. Obama's strategy is almost flawless so far - he's taken a high road on the campaign which has made Clinton look petty and mean - the latter a key attribute her campaign is trying to counter even as it struggles to fine Obama's Achilles heel.

Ironically the Clinton campaign's new advertising is designed to make people feel more "warm and fuzzy" towards Clinton. I see this as a strategic error. Everybody knows she is a tough and seasoned politically and has a hard and intense personality. Suggesting otherwise appears deceptive because it is, and also because media are viewing this approach skeptically - skepticism that rubs off on viewers. These are not attributes the campaign should be diminishing, rather they should be promoting her as a potentially "tough as nails" negotiator and commander in chief. Obama's campaign has recognized correctly that their goal is almost the opposite - make him kind, gentle, and accessible to the indecisive female voters who otherwise would have gone for Clinton on the basis of gender.

Lieberman endorses McCain

John McCain got a needed campaign boost with a Joe Lieberman endorsement, another from the Boston Globe, and a third from the DeMoines register.

McCain has been lagging in the polls despite his 2000 victory over GW Bush in the New Hampshire primary.

Meanwhile Barack Obama, now the Democratic frontrunner, and Mitt Romney are talking religion and politics more than they'd probably like to. Obama is defending himself against what appear to be Clinton campaign suggestions challenging his Christian roots, while Romney was heavily blasted by NBC's Tim Russert for his long support of questionable Mormon church policies.

Although negative attacks are just political business as usual, I'm disappointed that journalists like Russert and TV news are so quickly picking up and running with these irrelevancies. Religion is relevant to the character debate, and in the case of Huckabee, a minister, it would be good to clarify some allegiances, but I think suggestions that people can't separate religion and state are questionable in the case of all these candidates. Far more relevant are questions about governance and policy. Is it too much to expect more about that?

Iowa likes Obama

FOX just announced results from today's Iowa poll by an Iowa newspaper showing Obama with aa 9 point lead over Clinton. Although clearly Obama's doing very well in Iowa and appears to be gaining ground in New Hampshire, I remain skeptical that he can overturn the Clinton machine in the broader election, though certainly it's possible.

Obama is spending more in Iowa right now on advertising - I think about 450k weekly vs Clinton's 350k and his teams appear to be working harder. I think a decision was made some time back that Iowa was *the* key Obama priority, and that strategy may lead to an Iowa victory but will leave the campaign challenged in the big states. That said, Obama is on a tear and he could ride this to victory.

On the Republican side Huckabee announced that political mastermind Ed Rollins will take over the Huckabee campaign. Rollins was behind Ronald Reagan's victories and will bring a high level of sophistication to the Huckabee effort. Look for Romney v Huckabee with Giuliani fading and the rest of the pack out within a few months.

Kindergarten Drug Dealing rock the Democratic primary?

The Clinton campaign's desparate attempts to tarnish Obama with comments he has made about drug use and Kindergarten appear to be backfiring badly in the press and probably among voters, though it remains to be seen if the drug admissions by Obama in his biography may have some negative traction, especially in light of the huge Baseball steroid stories now swirling in the press.

The Clinton adviser that brought up the drug issues has resigned in what Chris Mathews of CNBC claims is a classic act of dishing the dirt, falling on your sword, and getting rehired later.

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.

Iowa Republican Debate

The Iowa Republican debate used a really intriguing audience meter that allowed you to guage the audience reaction in real time during the debate. I'm not at all convinced this is a "good" idea, but it sure was interesting.

The large debate fields are nice in terms of bringing in voices that might normally be stifled, but they really diminish the ability of the candidates to rise above sound bytes. That said, polls are fickle and it would be very questionable to deny any candidate with any viability the right to speak.

Alan Keyes sort of clawed his way into a few questions, accusing the moderator of ignoring him which she did appear to do at first. Keyes audience meter pretty much hit the floor when he first spoke but rose later during a passionate plea for more religion in education.

My take overall was that this debate will consolidate Romney and Huckabee as front runners in Iowa. Giuliani is becoming something of a wild card in the race as the national leader who appears to be in decline. His performace was steady but didn't seem to rise to the level of Huckabee, who is probably the most appealing public speaker in the Republican bunch.

Thompson

Giuliani: "Give the death penalty to the death tax"

Huckabee: Health Care reform: "kill the snake"

Romney: "We don't have to run a deficit" "Let the programs that don't work go", he's in favor of the "no child left behind" program. Higher pay for teachers.

McCain: No good conservative can support extensive subsidies. "Climate Change is real".

Tancredo: "Follow the constitution of this country" "Today we do far too many things.." "Nafta's been a disaster for many places...."

Thompson: We need to tell [rich] people we can't afford their medicare. ".... focus on preserving the tax cuts of 01 and 03". Nafta has helped USA as much as it has helped Mexico.

Hunter: "Nafta is a bad business deal"

Republican Debate in Iowa

In a few moments the Republicans will begin the Iowa debate, which comes at a critical time as attention is far more focused on the election and the race has tightened considerably in the polls, with Giuliani and Thompson, former presumptive frontrunners, quickly losing ground to Romney and Huckabee who appear likely to do well in Iowa.

Huckabee v Obama? Who'd have thunk it?

Despite our suggestions that Clinton and Romney are the presumptive nominees for the big matchup in November of 2008, Huckabee and Obama are surging in the national and state polls, giving each a decent shot at their party's nomination.

Morton Kondrake suggests Huckabee's appeal is as a "compassionate conservative", but suggests he does not have the money or organization for a likely win. Of course people tend to flock to popularity so money and support are already flowing to him. Obama already has an excellent organization and financing machine in place, and this week's Oprah extravaganzas, combined with his improving showing in the Iowa and NH polling, give him a real shot at the nomination.

Predictions? We are still saying Hilary v Romney in general election, but his is American politics and anything - and that means pretty much anything - can change the tide of history almost overnight.