Post Nevada Thoughts: What Happens in Vegas Stays in Vegas?

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 364

Nevada had its turn in the nominating contest spotlight this past weekend. The results indicate that the Democratic race remains wide open going in to South Carolina this weekend, race and gender remain live and dangerous wires, and there is no one on the other end of the line when it comes to labor endorsements and electoral victory. Here are some thoughts on these things and more.

Hillary Clinton

Okay, Hillary, you can exhale now. Sort of. Clinton turned out more supporters on Saturday than Barack Obama...and still won fewer delegates. But in terms of electoral narrative, if not electoral math, Hillary won the Nevada caucuses, which allows her to claim momentum with back-to-back wins over Obama. And momentum, of course, ties in to inevitability, the story line that the Clinton campaign has longed to emphasize from the beginning.

But Clinton's campaign, as enormous and well-funded as it is, has always been oriented more toward withstanding siege than launching assault. This week's campaign in South Carolina will tell much of the tale as to whether the Clinton operation can be as nimble going into the heart of the primary calendar as it has been pertinacious in the early contests. If not, then February 5 likely becomes for them an exercise in containing a once-again surging Barack Obama, rather than a march to victory.

Oddly enough, I think Hillary Clinton understands this dynamic and has internalized it. The question is whether the candidate herself can convey that message across all the layers of her vast campaign in the few days left before the South Carolina vote.

That will turn out to be a big part of the story going in to Saturday. Stay tuned.

Barack Obama

In the wake of losses in New Hampshire and Nevada, the Obama campaign finds itself in urgent need of a message makeover. It isn't that "hope" and "change" have stopped resonating with the electorate since the Iowa caucuses on January 3. Rather, Obama's signature themes have been overtaken by bedrock pocketbook concerns that, to many voters, makes the "old politics versus new" argument seem like an abstraction in comparison.

The trick for Obama now is to marry specific, credible proposals, especially on the economy and housing, to his mainstay themes in a way that effectively counterpunches the Clinton campaign's policy initiatives and drives home the message that new leadership and new political thinking are the best means of delivering concrete results to the country.

Race & Gender

The question for both Senator Clinton and Senator Obama now is whether the tactical ugliness indulged in by both during the run-up to Nevada's caucuses can be left behind in the West as the campaign swings to the Deep South state of South Carolina and its primary this coming Saturday, and then moves to the national canvas on February 5.

The answer is problematic. Ours is a culture with a collective memory capable of retaining only two things: one, the latest escapades of Britney and Paris; and two, every last detail of every statement ever made by anyone, anywhere and at any time on the subjects of race and gender. These are among the hottest of hot button issues, and if American socio-political history teaches anything, it is that hot buttons tend to get pushed, hard and often, sometimes merely because they're there.

It was probably inevitable that race and gender controversy would arise in the course of an historic campaign between the first credible woman and African-American presidential candidates. That being the case, one would have hoped that the Clinton and Obama campaigns would have given a bit more thought on how to more effectively navigate those hazards. In any case, the Nevada campaign has put those hot buttons on the table, and it will be difficult now for the candidates to keep them out of play going forward.

Labor Endorsements

One thing that is clear coming out of Nevada is that, in terms of securing victory in any of this cycle's nominating contests, endorsements from organized labor mean nothing. This is not to say that labor unions are suddenly irrelevant in Democratic politics. Far from it. Unions can channel money and boots on the ground in support of their chosen candidates quickly, effectively, and with unquestionable impact on behalf whomever they endorse. But the ability of unions to monolithically deliver the votes of its members to its endorsees - a far different matter - is all but nonexistent. Culinary Workers and Obama? SEIU and John Edwards? And, for that matter, harking back to Iowa, IAFF and Chris Dodd? The same story, all the way around. The message to candidates this cycle is don't count on a labor endorsement automatically turning into labor votes at the polls.

John Edwards

Based on the fact that the candidate left Nevada the day before the caucuses, I think it is fair to say that the Edwards campaign didn't think they had a legitimate shot at winning in the Silver State. But I don't think they expected a defeat of the magnitude John Edwards experienced on Saturday.

As I wrote following the New Hampshire primary, John Edwards would, by virtue of being the third wheel in the race, find himself in the middle of the two-person campaign he's been aiming at for months should defeat or other misfortune befall either Clinton or Obama. The key, of course, is to remain a credible candidate in the meantime, and that means staying genuinely competitive (i.e., tallying 15% or better) in every contest along the way.

Coming in with just 4% support in Nevada undermines the entire rationale for Edwards continuing his White House bid. A respectable showing in South Carolina this week, where Edwards was born and where he has been counting on doing well since the start of his campaign, now appears increasingly unlikely. This raises two questions for John Edwards: how can he keep his campaign alive after this Saturday, and, overwhelmingly more to the point, why should he?

I think John Edwards is staying in the race, for however long he continues to be able to do that, no longer in hope of securing the Democratic nomination. Rather, I believe that the rationale for a continued Edwards candidacy is based on Clinton and Obama coming out of the primaries in a near deadlock in terms of delegates won. In that event, a handful of delegates controlled by John Edwards puts him in the position of virtually nominating the candidate he prefers, on whatever terms he dictates.

Any such hope is pure fantasy, of course, both in expectation of a deadlocked convention and the ability of Edwards' delegates to swing it one way or the other. There is, at least at this point, no indication that Edwards' delegates will be decisive in determining the Democratic nomination any more than delegates pledged to Kucinich or Gravel (should there be any) would be. And that fact in itself reveals the crossroads at which the Edwards campaign now stands: absent a big win on Saturday, John Edwards will find himself playing in the same political league as the other also rans in this campaign. Ugly choices await.

Advice for Primary Voters

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 370

Ron Klain has a terrific op-ed piece in the New York Times today on the subject of electability. Klain's article points out a number of difficulties inherent in basing one's choice of candidate in a primary election on prognostications about how they will fare against the other party's candidate in the general election, and, along the way, throws in some sage advice for primary voters.

Aside from the dubious practical problems with picking candidates based on electability, there are other concerns too. When I was supporting Senator Joe Biden earlier this year, I often had people say to me, “I think Joe Biden would be a great president, but I won’t vote for him, because he can’t win.” In this way, electability becomes a tautology: voters won’t support a candidate who isn’t electable, and he isn’t electable because voters won’t vote for him.

It's a fair question, but, no, it wasn't just the pro-Biden quote above that got me. The most compelling argument in the piece follows.

More philosophically, an excessive focus on electability diminishes the franchise. Taking something as sacred as your presidential preference and turning it into an act of political prognostication cheapens your choice: being a voter is a more important job in our system than being a pundit or a consultant. Why should you cast your vote based on how you think others will vote (even if you could guess that accurately)? Why should their choice matter more than your own?

Yes, ultimately, presidential campaigns are about winning: a candidate who does not win cannot achieve policy changes or make the country a better place. And being mindful of the consequences of our votes is important, as many people who voted for Ralph Nader in 2000 — only to put George Bush in the White House, instead of Al Gore — have painfully learned.

But Klain's real gem is at the conclusion of the article, and goes to the heart of what primary elections are (or should be) all about.

If you want to back a winner in 2008, focus on persuading your neighbor to come over to your choice, instead of guessing how he will vote.

I could not agree more. The study of politics - things like polling, punditry and commentary (even on blogs like this one) - is to democracy as astronomy is to space travel: observation, rather than participation. Both may be necessary to their respective pursuits, but neither one will get you anywhere on its own. Involvement is the distinguishing factor.

If you care about who wins the next election, then ride the rocket: suit up, strap in, and hit the blast off switch. Don't settle for watching through a telescope.

iPol Plus One

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 371

Happy birthday to us! Today marks the one year anniversary of iPol's first post. From the midst of the A-list star-studded gala marking this auspicious occasion - well, okay, not...but I can honestly say we're giving last night's Golden Globes a run for their money where star power is concerned - I'd like to thank our readers for coming along with us through a year's worth of politicking in the heartland and beyond.

iPol's original mission was to chronicle, for myself as much as anyone else, the political spectacle leading up to the Iowa caucuses, and capture just the tiniest bit of what it's like to be at the center of the political universe for while. While the campaign spotlight has moved on now, no other place in the country will have the extended opportunity to meet, question, challenge, fawn over, and generally poke and prod the candidates in quite the same way, and certainly not for the same amount of time, that Iowa has had. I have been so lucky to be here, to have seen so much first hand and be a part of making the first binding decisions about who will be the next President of the United States. I have taken that seriously, out of respect for the fact that very few people are afforded the same opportunity; at the same time, I've tried not to take things so seriously as to prevent iPol from being a fun read. I like to think that I've succeeded in both informing and entertaining all of you.

In any case, my thanks to the readers who have been kind enough to spend a little time here with me, for your unflagging interest in what makes part of our political process tick, for your often insightful comments and feedback, and, I am sure, your frequent patience with this site and with me. It has been, and continues to be, a very rewarding experience, and I hope you feel the same.

Here's to the year to come, as well as the year just past. Cheers!

Kucinich and Michigan

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 372

Dennis4President is at it again. This time it's Michigan.

Readers may recall that at the height of caucus leapfrog frenzy last year, all Democratic candidates withdrew from the Michigan primary ballot except Hillary Clinton and Chris Dodd, in avowed adherence to the Democratic National Committee's judgment that the state party had violated the national party's rules in holding its primary too early in the calendar. It turned out, however, that for whatever reason, the Kucinich campaign, while protesting that it tried to withdraw from the Michigan ballot, actually missed the dealine to file its paperwork, and, wouldn't you know, remained on the ballot for the primary.

Here's the Kucinich campaign's press release, dated October 9, 2007:

Kucinich withdraws from Michigan Democratic primary ballot

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE - Tuesday, October 9, 2007

DOVER, NH - The Kucinich for President campaign announced this afternoon that it has filed an affidavit with the Michigan Secretary of State's office officially requesting that the name of Ohio Congressman and Democratic Presidential candidate Dennis Kucinich be withdrawn from the Michigan Democratic primary ballot.

The sworn statement requesting withdrawal was submitted via fax by Kucinich National Campaign Manager Mike Klein shortly before today's 4 p.m. deadline.

At the same time, the Kucinich campaign issued the following statement on behalf of the candidate, who is campaigning in Arizona today:

"We signed a public pledge recently, promising to stand with New Hampshire, Nevada, South Carolina, and the DNC-approved 'early window', and the action we are taking today protects New Hampshire's first-in-the-nation primary status, and Nevada's early caucus."

The statement continued: "We support the grassroots nature of the New Hampshire, small-state primary, and we support the diversity efforts that Chairman Dean and the DNC instituted last year, when they added Nevada and South Carolina to the window in January 2008. We are obviously committed to New Hampshire's historic role."

Klein, who recently moved to Dover, NH to run the national Kucinich campaign, added, "We will continue to adhere to the DNC-approved primary schedule."

###

Or not.

Tonight, the Kucinich campaign issued another press release which - and tell me if you didn't see this one coming - appeals to supporters to "Help Dennis Win Votes in Michigan." Seriously. Here's the statement from the Kucinich campaign:

Michigan can make a big difference to this campaign. We need to get our people to the polls on Tuesday and you can help, no matter where you live.

We are asking supporters to call a small list of Michigan voters and urge them to get out and vote for Dennis. If you already have an account, please log in. If you are new to this effort, just go to: www.call4dennis.com and register at the bottom of the page. A script and instructions will be provided.

There are only three active candidates on the Democratic primary ballot - Dennis Kucinich, Hillary Rodham Clinton and Mike Gravel. So please do your best to convince people that a vote for Dennis is a real vote for change.

Thank you for everything you do. Every effort, every contribution, no matter how small will help.

Strength through Peace,
The Kucinich Calling from Home Team

### [emphasis added]

This incident is absolutely classic Dennis Kucinich: protestations of righteous intent, and then, when he thinks he can get away with it, a cynical move like this that shows just how driven by a craven need for attention - in this case, the possibility of headlines following a second-place finish behind Hillary Clinton in Michigan, where, golly gee gosh, in spite of all his many efforts, his name still appears on the ballot - his repeated presidential bids really are.

I can hardly wait to see the Kucinich campaign's and supporters' defense of yet another "principled stand" by Dennis4President. The comment lines are open!

New Clinton Ad: "Listen"

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 374

Hillary Clinton has launched a new ad in Nevada and South Carolina. Titled "Listen," the 30-second spot intersperses scenes of Clinton interacting with voters and excerpts of her victory speech in New Hampshire.

The script for the ad is as follows:

[Clinton] “Over the last week I listened to you and in the process I found my own voice.

You helped remind everyone that politics isn’t a game.

This campaign is about people. About making a difference in your lives.

It’s time we had a president who stands up for all of you.”

“I’m Hillary Clinton and I approved this message.”

And here's the video:

Richardson's Farewell (and non-endorsement)

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 375

As widely reported yesterday, Bill Richardson has dropped his bid for the White House. With Biden, Dodd and now Richardson out of the race, I fear that it's so long policy, hello 24/7 celebrity from here to the finish line.

Here is the text of Richardson's withdrawal email, sent to supporters earlier today:

It is with great pride, understanding and acceptance that I am ending my campaign for President of the United States. It was my hope that all of you would first hear this news from me and not a news organization. But unfortunately, as with too many things in our world today, it's the ending of something that garners the most intense interest and speculation.

I knew from the beginning that this would be an uphill climb. When I entered the campaign, it was clear that we, as Democrats, had the most talented field of candidates in my lifetime running to change the direction of our country. And in the end, one of them will.

Despite overwhelming financial and political odds, I am proud of the campaign we waged and the influence we had on the issues that matter most to the future of this country.

A year ago, we were the only major campaign calling for the removal of all of our troops within a year's time from Iraq. We were the only campaign calling for a complete reform of education in this country, including the scrapping of No Child Left Behind. And we were the campaign with the most aggressive clean energy plan and the most ambitious standards for reducing global warming.

Now, all of the remaining candidates are coming to our point of view. I am confident that the next President of the United States will implement much of what we've been urging for the last twelve months, and our nation and world will be the better for it.

There are so many of you who gave so much to this campaign. For that, I will be forever grateful. Running for president has been, at times, humbling and at other times, exhilarating. I have grown and learned a great deal from the experience, and I am a better person for it.

Also, because of your close friendship and support throughout the ups and downs of what is a very grueling and demanding process, I have never felt alone.

Running for president brings out the best in everyone who graces the stage, and I have learned much from the other candidates running. They have all brought great talents and abilities to the campaign.

Senator Biden's passion and intellect are remarkable.

Senator Dodd is the epitome of selfless dedication to public service and the Democratic Party.

Senator Edwards is a singular voice for the most downtrodden and forgotten among us.

Senator Obama is a bright light of hope and optimism at a time of great national unease, yet he is also grounded in thoughtful wisdom beyond his years.

Senator Clinton's poise in the face of adversity is matched only by her lifetime of achievement and deep understanding of the challenges we face.

Representative Kucinich is a man of great decency and dedication who will faithfully soldier on no matter how great the odds.

And all of us in the Democratic Party owe Senator Mike Gravel our appreciation for his leadership during the national turmoil of Vietnam.

I am honored to have shared the stage with each of these Democrats. And I am enormously grateful to all of my supporters who chose to stand with me despite so many other candidates of accomplishment and potential.

Now that my time in this national campaign has come to an end, I would urge those who supported my candidacy to take a long and thoughtful look at the remaining Democrats. They are all strong contenders who each, in their own way, would bring desperately needed change to our country. All I ask is that you make your own independent choice with the same care and dedication to this country that you honored me with during this campaign. At this time, I will not endorse any candidate.

Now I am returning to a job that I love, serving a state that I cherish and doing the work of the people I was elected to serve. As I have always said, I am the luckiest man I know. I am married to my high school sweetheart. I live in a place called the Land of Enchantment. I have the best job in the world. And I just got to run for president of the United States.

It doesn't get any better than that.

With my deepest appreciation for all that you have done,

Bill

Governor Bill Richardson
The Governor's Mansion
Santa Fe, New Mexico

AP: Bill Richardson to Drop Out

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 376

The Associated Press is reporting that New Mexico Governor Bill Richardson is dropping his presidential bid following disappointing back-to-back fourth-place finishes in Iowa and New Hampshire.

According to the report, Richardson will announce his decision tomorrow. No word yet on whether the Governor will endorse another candidate at that time.

You Only Live Twice: Clinton, McCain Win New Hampshire

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 377

"Reports of my death have been greatly exaggerated."

~ Samuel L. Clemens, 1897

Politicians love to quote this line any time they or their favored causes pull back from the brink of failure. There have been few occasions in recent American political campaigns, however, when the quote has applied so readily as it does this morning to the revived fortunes of Hillary Clinton and John McCain.

Both McCain and Clinton have been declared dead in the course of this campaign, McCain in the spring and summer of 2007, and Clinton less than 24 hours ago. And yet, thanks to the voters of New Hampshire, both are very much alive today. Here's a look at some things worth noting about what happened in last night's New Hampshire primary.

- Undecideds: in the final 72 hours of the campaign, those who waited until the last minute to make up their minds went as much for Clinton as they did for Obama. This was as decisive as anything else in determining the outcome, as it made up for any loss of support Clinton may have experienced in the aftermath of her defeat in last week's Iowa caucuses.

- Independent voters: New Hapshire voters registered as Independents broke for John McCain, siphoning those votes away from Barack Obama. This may have been because national security was perhaps the biggest issue on voter's minds, nudging them towards the hawkish McCain, or perhaps was merely driven by the horse race. As Bill Bradley observed over at Pajamas Media, "It may well be that expectations of a sizeable Obama win, in virtually every poll, led more independents to vote for McCain, feeling that the real contest was on the Republican side."

- The women's vote and the Bill factor: much is being made in the media of the fact that women broke decisively for Clinton and against Obama in New Hampshire, countering a nearly opposite trend from last week's Iowa caucuses. Similarly, some are smirking that Hillary Clinton would be out of the race this morning but for the exertions of her husband. Let me caution against interpreting this result as either some sort of electoral chick flick or the tale of a damsel in distress rescued by a Knight in Shining Armor. Both ideas are as wrong about Hillary Clinton as they are insulting to the voters of New Hampshire.

While more women voters supported Hillary Clinton than Barack Obama yesterday, I've seen no evidence to support the inference some are making that they did so based primarily on gender identification, and it strikes me as pretty silly to suggest so.

As to Bill Clinton's role in the New Hampshire campaign, of course any candidate - Hillary included - would rather have the support of a uniquely gifted campaigner who is also a hugely popular former president than not. And while drawing parallels with Bill Clinton's "comeback kid" second place finish in New Hampshire in 1992 is proving irresistible for many, such comparisons are entirely specious. Yes, New Hampshire is indisputably friendly territory to the Clintons, but there is again no evidence to support the suggestion some are making that Clinton rode to victory on her husband's coat tails. For one thing, it defies logic that anyone should win any election anywhere based on their relation to someone else who finished second there more than a decade before. Hillary Clinton first became known to New Hampshire voters, of course, through Bill Clinton's 1992 campaign there. But the Clinton campaign fashioned New Hampshire as its Granite Firewall months ago, and Hillary has worked hard to make her own name there ever since. New Hampshire voters cast their ballots yesterday for Hillary, not Bill.

John McCain's connection to New Hampshire, incidentally, is arguably much stronger than Hillary Clinton's, winning here as he did against George W. Bush back in 2000. McCain succeeded in tapping the residue of that success, which helped him enormously in yesterday's voting.

The real question now is where Clinton and McCain go from New Hampshire this morning. McCain goes on to Michigan, another state he won eight years ago, to battle putative native son Mitt Romney. Hillary Clinton, while unquestionably resuscitated by last night's win, remains a candidate on the edge, with far from certain prospects in Nevada and South Carolina. The reality is that Hillary Clinton must make fundamental shifts in both tactics and strategy if she hopes to fulfill her ambition to become the next president. It is key that Clinton and her enormous but to this point less-than-agile campaign actually put into practice her pledge that, "we’re going to take what we’ve learned here in New Hampshire and we’re going to rally on and make our case."

So now we have a race with no frontrunner in either party. McCain's victory revives his campaign, but it does not reshape the Republican field. After consecutive losses in Iowa and New Hampshire, states that were the cornerstones of his electoral strategy, Mitt Romney's candidacy is reduced to the absolute necessity of winning in Michigan, which, with his name recognition (Mitt's father George was Governor of Michigan) and his vast personal fortune committed to the race, he may well do. Mike Huckabee remains today what he was yesterday, the uncertain hope of the tottering religious right. And lurking in the swamps of Florida and the airwaves of the Super Tuesday behemoths is Rudy Giuliani, who has made token nods at best to the small states of the early contests. And on the Democratic side, Barack Obama comes out of his three point loss in New Hampshire diminished but little, if at all. A week ago, few would have predicted he would do so well as he did last night in New Hampshire, and he retains full capacity to continue to scare the life out of the Clinton campaign every time he utters the word "change."

And I thought this campaign was going to stop being fun when it left Iowa!

Thoughts on New Hampshire

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 378

I finally got a chance last night to watch a recording of the ABC/WMUR/Facebook debate. Here are some quick thoughts, combined with general observations about the post-Iowa state of things.

Hillary Clinton

With a stinging third place finish for Hillary Clinton in Iowa still very fresh in the public mind, Saturday's debate presented Clinton with a unique opportunity to show a watching world what, if anything, she learned from the first electoral setback of her career. Unfortunately for Clinton, what the audience saw was a hunkered down candidate, gritting her teeth through what she too-evidently views as a mercifully abbreviated campaign in yet another pesky small state of negligible importance and counting the days until she can wage the sort of media-driven national campaign she would clearly be more comfortable running. She appeared neither relaxed, nor reevaluative, nor inclined in the slightest to do a single thing differently today than she was doing a week ago. Cranky and on defense, Clinton appeared more primed for an argument than prepped for a debate.

Which, I think, reflects the state of things within the Clinton campaign generally, and raises the question: did you guys have no Plan B? Did no one in the Clinton campaign ever once raise a hand and posit a couple of What Ifs: What If one day the sun did not rise in the East, What If the birds did not fly south for the winter, and What If Hillary Clinton actually lost in Iowa? As it is, Hillary Clinton and her campaign have responded to last Thursday's result with increasingly negative attacks/drawing sharp distinctions (take your pick) on Barack Obama, while simultaneously trying to outdo him at promoting "change" as a campaign mantra. Three words on Hillary Clinton: in deep trouble.

John Edwards

The quickest of scans through posts on this site tagged "John Edwards" will reveal that I am not his biggest fan. So sit down before you read this next part: I think John Edwards won the debate Saturday night. Edwards won not because of any brilliant answers, per se, although his "she didn't make these kinds of attacks when she was ahead" molotov at Hillary Clinton was hands-down the best line of the night. No, John Edwards won at St. Anselm because of what that debate revealed about his strategy coming out of Iowa.

Saturday night saw John Edwards punching away at his mainstay populist themes and steering pretty clear of directly hitting either Obama or Richardson, keeping himself focused on attacking a newly vulnerable Hillary Clinton. Politically, this is absolutely the right course of action for John Edwards on a number of levels.

Placing second in Iowa after four years of non-stop campaigning here was almost as bad for John Edwards as placing third was for Hillary Clinton. But with the race now indisputably a three-way contest between himself, Obama and Clinton (sorry, Governor Richardson), Edwards is clearly now focused on simply hanging in there through February 5 and beyond in the near-certain knowledge that either Obama or Clinton will drop out at some point, which then injects Edwards into the center of the two-person race he's been positioning himself for since at least the middle of last summer when he decided it was no more mister nice guy and went angry populist. John Edwards now doesn't have to win anything to achieve his central strategic goal for at least the next two months. All he has to do is stay competitive until one or the other of his principal opponents drops. That is brilliant strategic political thinking from John Edwards, which leaves me nearly as impressed as I am surprised.

Barack Obama

Saturday night was one of Barack Obama's more comfortable debate performances, I thought. He finally found his voice on health care, dealing effectively with Clinton's charge that his plan is "not universal," which will pay dividends for him as the campaign progresses. I also found fascinating the way in which Obama made tactical alliance with John Edwards in response to some of Clinton's points. That tactic makes Obama and Edwards seem collegial and of good will, while leaving Clinton looking isolated and shrill. There's not much that Clinton can do in response, save to cry foul for "piling on," which, you may recall, served her poorly in Iowa. But the next time you hear Hillary Clinton and her campaign complaining that Obama is getting a free ride in the media, know that this is part of what she's talking about.

Bill Richardson

Let's save lots of keystrokes for everyone right now and simply admit that Bill Richardson has won the Likability Primary coming out of Iowa. And then let's save further untold keystrokes by admitting that's the only primary he's likely to win this year.

Post Hoc, Ergo Propter Hoc

Days Until Bush Leaves Office = 380

Thursday's caucus already seems as though it took place a year ago. And while my preferred candidate Joe Biden is now out of the race, the race continues, as does this page.

Lots of emotions about Thursday's outcome, and interested readers can click over to Pajamas Media, where I've jotted down some thoughts about it all; feel free to leave comments either here or there. You can also listen in on an interview I did on New Year's Day with XM Satellite Radio's Channel #130, POTUS '08 (my part starts about 16 minutes into the show). Later this weekend, I'll also be putting up a quick take on the outcome and what I think it means, so stay tuned.

In the meantime, there's tonight's debate in New Hampshire. Unlike Iowa's leisurely year at the center of the political universe, the Granite State gets the entire campaign blasted at it in warp speed over the course of less than a week. Have fun, guys!

I'll be back later tonight with some thoughts on the debate.