New Hampshire and Sanity

Last night I listened to more coverage than I should have about the New Hampshire primary votes in both the Democratic and Republican primaries. As there is today on the blog circuit there is a lot of punditicating about what was happening. Well, I for one do not buy any of it. Did voters in Iowa vote more heavily for Obama because of a "reverse Bradley effect" (Named after Tom Bradley who some pundits claimed lost a close election for Governor because voters when they went into the booth let their underlying racism take over) or was it the Feiler/Skurnik Effect (which postulates that with the 24/7 news cycle that more and more voters wait until the last minute to make up their minds)? Or was it the Reverse Tom Hanks Theory (There is crying in politics even if there isn't in baseball). Or did the voters simply make a decision that was reflected in the polls?

The bonehead of the night had to be Hugh Hewitt. His guy (Romney) was crushed in his next door state after spending lots of dough and being ahead in the polls but here was the Salem Radio host claiming that it was not really a victory for McCain.

Here is where I see the races at this point.

Democratic - this one is easier. This is a two person race. Edwards is pathetic and ultimately will be forced out even if the unions keep paying his ticket. I admire the tenacity of the Clinton people but I would not underestimate the demand in the democratic electorate for change. If the national polls are at all accurate and if neither candidate makes a big blunder expect this to tighten up.

Republican - this is complex. There are credibly a couple of real candidates -Huckabee (although I am not convinced that the Christian right will sustain him when the lights go on in real states), Romney (although I would bet he will begin to fall in standing soon - two silvers and a gold in Wyoming for $120 million does not make it), McCain and Giuliani (although it is unclear whether he can make his ropa-dope strategy of avoiding the early states to concentrate on February 5).

If the rest of the candidates on both sides have not yet dropped out they should take a cue from George Burns - say good night Gracie.

One other comment. A lot of commentators and pundits have been arguing that the race for the presidency would be collapsed this year because of the advancement of the process. My suspicion is that the race has a lot more twists and turns in the process. It seems clear that while there is a lot of chatter, even among the voters, about the desire for change (and indeed this seems greater than in previous elections), there is not a clear consensus about where the mandate for change will land. The media have had a lot of coverage about this election but my perception is that there is a lot of potential movement left.