Archives

You are currently viewing archive for January 2008
Category: Campaign 2008.9
Posted by: A Waco Farmer
Back in March of 2006, I began my first month of blogging by asking myself:

why was I so dead-set against McCain six years ago?

My answer was uncertain:

Frankly, it is hard to remember exactly, but I came to genuinely dislike him for a time.

January 2008: I am starting to remember.

McCain is a decent fellow, I continue to believe. While his opponents ruthlessly distort his political record, he is, in truth, a center-right politician, who would make a good president, especially on issues of national security.

Having said that, he does have several personality traits that I find hard to abide. I have, once again, come to see his "straight-talk express" as a gimmick. He bellows about integrity and truth telling. He inveighs against his main opponent for distorting his record on immigration to shamelessly cover the truth that he continually revises, extends, and attempts to tamp down his unpopular statements on amnesty. Then McCain turns around and despicably invents a completely erroneous attack on Mitt Romney concerning his stance on the Iraq War. When confronted, McCain raises his voice and doubles his bet. Shameless. Moreover, McCain is also thin-skinned and petulant, and he is too quick to assume the victim pose. Everybody is always out to get him. Toughen up, John. Politics is a tough business.

Having said that, from the very beginning, I have believed that the best one-on-one match-up for the GOP is Hillary Clinton vs. McCain. He will run a very competitive campaign, which he might win. Even if he does not, he is a moderate Republican, and Hillary will need to run as a moderate Democrat to win. She will run to the center, and she cannot beat McCain and win election as president without committing to finish the war in Iraq. This is the most important issue of our time.

On the other hand, McCain most likely loses big to Obama. I am convinced he cannot get past the visuals. Obama is tall, handsome, vigorous, and youthful; while McCain is short, ugly, tired, and old. McCain is unable to stand on the same stage as Barack Obama and have a prayer of winning.

On the other hand, while I think Mitt Romney has the potential of losing to Hillary in an absolutely historic fashion, I think he matches up much better against Obama. And who knows, really, Romney might continue to improve as a candidate as the year drones on; he might very well grow into a race against Hillary.

My initial reaction to Romney was lukewarm--but, as circumstances have played out, I have come to appreciate him. Perhaps that is faint praise--but we are down to some imperfect choices.

On the other hand, the biggest problem with McCain is that he is a non-starter (make that deal-breaker) for too many important components of our party.

One more positive for Romney: the new most important issue in this election is the economy. Mitt Romney exudes confidence and competence in this area.

Bottom Line: as so many thoughtful people have written this week, things are still in a pretty big mess for the GOP.
My mantra, Nobody Knows Anything, stands out conspicuously as my wisest utterance this entire extended season of national decision. Although I have repeatedly sprinkled this caveat throughout my extensive writings on Campaign 2008, I am sure that I have not said it enough. Nobody Knows Anything--and that goes double for me.

Having said that, we are in the midst of another "Hillary is finished" frenzy, but I am not at all convinced that her opponent's recent overwhelming victory in the Palmetto State and/or the endorsement of Liberal Lion, Ted Kennedy, seals the deal for the man from Illinois.

Not that I am not in awe of Barack Obama. I am.

Although Hillary is surprisingly adept and polished as a candidate for president (she is much, much better than I thought she would be), Obama is a once-in-a-generation wonder. He is the charismatic new kid in town about whom we know almost nothing--but on whom we are anxious to project our most sanguine hopes for ourselves, our nation, and our future. He is electric. He is on fire. He is in "the zone" of maximized self-actualization.

In many ways, however, Barack Obama is playing a desperate (and undoubtedly frustrating) game of "beat the clock." He must take control of this race by next Tuesday. Surely, if this nomination process had unraveled week by week, one primary at a time, over a three-month period, the incredibly attractive and energetic Obama would have overcome the Clintons, who seem to be tired, cranky, and taking on water. But in one week, Democrats in twenty-five states and voting districts will choose a candidate. This may prove to be a contest in which organization and two decades of planning, cajoling, and social networking overcomes youthful enthusiasm and raw talent. We will soon see.

If not now for Obama, when? How long will this sensational ride atop the fickled American political culture last? No one can say. He is young. One might think, if he comes up short this time, there will be other subsequent chances for this developing phenom to ascend the greasy pole and claim his due. But political life is unpredictable. There is a saying in cattle country about "striking while the iron is hot."

Oftentimes fate turns on a dime. It seems unlikely that a more propitious moment awaits Mr. Barack Obama. Popularity is fleeting and seldom moves consistently forward and upward. Tomorrow is a mystery. Now is the time for Obama. Luck be a Lady Tonight.

The now is the frustration, however. He is so close he can taste it. He made the right decision to make his move for the oval office when he did. But Obama is not quite there--and the clock is ticking. He had a chance to stampede Hillary Clinton after Iowa--but, somehow, and no one yet has come up with a satisfying answer of just how, it did not quite come together in New Hamshire.

He was supposed to win Nevada--but, somehow, he came up a bit short there as well. He got the unions (a huge coup)--but he still could not quite deliver on game day. He won huge in South Carolina--but there is a lingering worry that he might have gotten "rope-a-doped" in that round. Even as the mainstream media trumpets his successes, cynical pundits warn that he has fallen into a trap of racial politics set by his wily opponents.

And the speed of the game is increasing exponentially. He is moving fast. To shore up the Latino vote in the West (and avoid Nevada writ large), he is promoting his record of favoring drivers licenses for illegal aliens. All the polls say this is long-term poison--but the long term does not matter if one dies a political death in the now. You cannot save your ace for Game Seven, if you are the verge of elimination in Game Six. Obama is pulling out all the stops. Super Tuesday, February 5, is huge; is it bigger than his grassroots movement? No one knows. He has the money. He now has the endorsements. He is better positioned than any other previous insurgent candidate. But does he have the poise, experience, and supporting cast to pull this rabbit out of the hat when the game is on the line?

We will know soon.

A thought (on the relevance of the Kennedy imprimatur):

I will be very surprised if any Latinos on the West Coast give one solitary damn about Ted Kennedy--but who knows?

One Final Thought on the endorsements:
I am convinced that they mean very little in terms of votes (no reasonable person would change his mind because Ted Kennedy told him to), but they are an important barometer of the race. More and more heavyweight Democrats (no insult intended) see Team Clinton as vulnerable; they are taking the opportunity to kick the Clintons in the teeth and curry favor with the likely winner. This trend must be part of the calculus. Most of these folks are canny political operators.
Dick Morris has it right, essentially, in his latest column:

Clinton Will Win the Nomination by Losing S.C.

Old News: Dick Morris is a hack; that is, he has an uncanny sense for getting things right in the present (what is happening on the ground somewhere today), but he is usually completely misguided in the long term. Hillary was unstoppable until Hillary was finished; now, evidently, Hillary has won the nomination with a clever plan to take advantage of race in this campaign.

One other note: Morris views the world through a deep visceral hatred for the Clintons (especially Hillary).

One last shot: in a year in which the smartest thing I have said all season is "nobody knows anything," it is hard to take a pundit seriously who shamelessly markets his ability to "know all the answers."

Having said that, his thesis today is a near-bullseye.

Hillary will lose South Carolina in a big way as a result of a massive black vote for Obama, which will forever shatter Obama's aura of racial transcendence.

That is correct.

We love Obama because he represents a bridge to a future age in which we will realize the dream of a race-blind society. Although this truly is a contradiction-laden "fairy tale," we desperately want to elect this charismatic African American on the basis of his intellect and character. More than anything else, his ability to provide racial redemption is the foundation for his message of hope.

What Morris so shrewdly detects is the fragility of that political currency. Or, as Margaret Carlson wrote last week, when she saw Al Sharpton on TV defending Barack Obama, she "realized that the Clintons had done what they needed to do to stop Obama's historic surge in its tracks."

A racial division in this contest equals the end of the fantasy.

What Morris and Carlson both exaggerate is the conspiratorial character this latest development in a thoroughly wacky race. I am convinced that the Clintons optimistically strategized at some point that they might actually win the African American vote in South Carolina, casting Obama as not nearly as black as Bill. This would have worked just fine in their big picture. A win is always better than a loss.

However, Obama's viability awakened a race pride in African Americans all over the nation. No problem. Plan B--and I am guessing this idea come on the fly--make Obama run on race. Plan B was helped by Team Obama's lack of foresight in attacking Lyndon Johnson.

In truth, you can believe LBJ was instrumental to civil rights and not be racist, the Bill "fairy tale" remark was taken out of context, and the "moratorium" on discussing Obama's admitted cocaine use is evidence of preferential treatment based on race--not the other way around.

Team Obama stepped into a punch on this one. They needed to fight the perfect fight to win, and they made a mistake. Only time will tell if Obama can overcome the error.

22/01: So Long, Fred

Category: Campaign 2008.9
Posted by: A Waco Farmer
Fred is out. A post mortem.

1. Fred was arguably the best candidate--but he ran the worst campaign.

2. There was always an uncomfortable paradox in my prediction that Mrs. Clinton would/will prevail ultimately in the Democratic canvass, which I base(d) on her superior organization, extensive and meticulous pre-planning, financial advantage, and her prodigious will to win, while at the same time I expected Fred Thompson to emerge victorious on the GOP side, even as he offered the worst organization, an almost spontaneous decision to seek the office, a dismal financial foundation, and an eighteenth-century-style disinterest in running.

3. Why my erroneous hunch that Fred could pull it off? I figured Fred had a chance based on the peculiar make-up of the Republican campaign; that is, since all the GOP contenders arrived seriously flawed, the race was always (and still is, most likely) vulnerable to a late-arriving charismatic candidate espousing an enticing mix of confidence, fresh policy ideas, and conservative orthodoxy.

4. Although I wrote that South Carolina was "Fred's Last Stand," in truth, this campaign remains so loony that nothing really necessitates that Fred exit at this moment. But he obviously wants out--and that is that. You can lead a horse to water--but you cannot make him run...

5. What now? McCain or Romney? Or someone else? Is there anyone else? Fred staying in for a longer run would have done more toward keeping things unpredictable, further complicating the drive to amass a majority of delegates. With Fred gone, he increases the chances of one candidate eventually emerging as the winner before the Republican convention. Is this good? The punditry declares that a deadlocked convention gives the Democrats an advantage. I am not sure about that.

6. Perhaps a contested convention would increase interest in the Republican spectacle, offering a platform for whomever might rise from the ashes of Minneapolis. A someone who might not be a currently declared candidate. A dark horse perhaps? Who knows? Moreover, a new candidate appearing in late summer would scramble the opposition research machine and might actually excite the public's short attention span, which, by Labor Day, will undoubtedly see Obama as the familiar and be looking for something new by then.

The wildest possibility: Fred emerges as a compromise choice in a deadlocked convention (with Newt Gingrich as the VP).

7. Back to reality: with Fred out, look for the rest of conservative orthodoxy to reluctantly line up behind Romney, setting up the battle royale between the McCain insurgents and the forces of the neo-traditional Rush Limbaugh wing of the party.

PS After his loss in South Carolina, seemingly, finally Huckabee should be "Hucka-was."
Category: Campaign 2008.9
Posted by: A Waco Farmer
A few final thoughts on South Carolina:

1. The most recent numbers in South Carolina continue to indicate a two-man race between John McCain and Mike Huckabee. Of course, while scientific samplings are fairly accurate most of the time, we have grown accustomed to wildly erroneous polling in recent days. Is there one more surprise out there? That is, can Fred Thompson come from nowhere to impact this contest? Unlikely on its face--but certainly not impossible.

An aside: In a real physical sense, I cannot seem to accept the idea of McCain or Huckabee winning tomorrow night. Of course, that very well may be my heart talking--rather than some prescient instinct.

2. Some positive notes:

With Romney concentrating on Nevada, the "Stop McCain and Huckabee" movement has one clear alternative in the Palmetto State: Fred.

The late-breaking “undecideds” are the element that has been giving pollsters fits. Fred has a shot at swaying this vital segment (see below).

If the conservative establishment has any power in South Carolina, Fred Thompson ought to win a lot of votes. The big boys of talk radio have pressed hard for Thompson over the last forty-eight hours. They are the noncoms of the conservative army--and they are important. How influential? We will know soon.

Fred is doing us proud, finally hitting his stride and finding his voice (to borrow a phrase). For the last fortnight, he has been heads and tails above the crowd at every outing.

3. Pointing Fingers: Fred's unorthodox anti-campaign campaign is an acquired taste; it takes time to appreciate his retro approach. I sense that he is on the verge of breaking through, but almost is not going to make it tomorrow night. No results in SC and Fred Thompson is finished.

If he does not come through tomorrow night, who to blame?

The Republican faithful for overlooking him amidst the circus; we should have worked harder to see the big picture.

The media for dismissing him when he turned out to be different than what they anticipated.

And Fred himself for not giving us more time. It is one thing to wage a laid-back under-the-radar campaign that attempts to turn back time--but he should have understood that his method might take some time to sink in. Offering the least glitzy and least dynamic style is not a good combination with the most truncated campaign.

4. Not writing Fred off (holding out some hope), but, if the worst happens, it is Romney the rest of the way by default.
Category: Campaign 2008.9
Posted by: A Waco Farmer
From Tocqueville (Wednesday PM):

Last night, Romney lifted this message directly from Rush Limbaugh's program yesterday, which I think was a GREAT move:


"Tonight is a victory for optimism over Washington-style pessimism. (applause) What we're going to see in the next few days is Democrats say that they're the party of change. (grumbling) You're going to hear Hillary Clinton, Barack Obama, and John Edwards, saying that they're the party of change, and I think they would bring change to America, just not the kind we want. You see, I think they take their inspiration from the Europe of old: big government, Big Brother, big taxes. They fundamentally in their hearts believe, that America is great because we have a great government -- and we do have a great government, but that's not what makes us the best nation, the strongest nation, the greatest nation on earth. What makes us such a great nation is the American people. I take my inspiration from Ronald Reagan and George Herbert Walker Bush, who said we are a great and good people. It's exactly what we are, it's why we will always be the most powerful nation on earth."

A Waco Farmer:

I agree with Tocqueville. You have to admire Romney's game. He is smart enough to understand that he cannot win the nomination without bringing along Limbaugh (unlike Huck and McCain—who seem unwilling to accept this basic fact of life). Romney is positioning himself as an acceptable alternative to Huckabee and/or McCain. In my mind, this race comes down to a contest between Romney and Thompson. Rush is clearly for Thompson, and Thompson has his last last chance on Saturday night in South Carolina. But if Thompson cannot get traction, Limbaugh et al will have no choice but to support Romney to thwart either Huckabee or McCain, both of whom he detests.

Another note: I haven't heard as much impassioned yelling on Talk Radio in years. The conservative talkers are pulling out all the stops to stop Mac and Huck--and they will.

One last note: as the economy cools down (and heats up as an issue—what war in Iraq?), Romney and his optimism becomes increasingly attractive. He is authentically the no-nonsense, straight arrow whom we can trust to fix things.

The path to victory for Romney is suddenly wide open and well lit.
An admission: I did not watch politics last night. I spent most of the evening thinking about Lyndon Johnson. Nevertheless, here is what I think last night might mean.

Some quick reactions to Michigan off the top of my head:

1. The Y2K of American politics failed to materialize last night. The season of the witches for conservative orthodoxy perhaps is coming to a close.

I have said this once before and been dead wrong, but I declare John McCain officially finished. If he cannot win in Michigan with all the available independents and Democrats, how can he win in core Republican venues? McCain will run hard in South Carolina, of course, but his chances there seem increasingly improbable. A loss in the Palmetto State places his campaign on a seemingly unrecoverable lethal trajectory.

2. Romney had a great week campaigning. A lot of observers (including our Tocqueville--who predicted this big win) sensed a renewed vigor in the former Massachusetts governor. He looks to be hitting his stride.

3. Romney is back. Since the entire canvass remains so horribly muddled, Michigan places Romney back on top of the game (at least for a brief moment). Despite all the talk over the last twelve days of his demise, Romney now rolls into the South with momentum and the aura of a winner. While South Carolina will undoubtedly take the bloom off of that a bit--the trip to the winner's circle in an important contest permanently changes public perception of this candidate. Romney is now indisputably viable.

4. No poll before last night has any meaning. We can expect a big bounce for Romney and a big dip for McCain following this telling contest.

5. Huckawho? The next must-win scenario? Mike Huckabee must take South Carolina. My hunch is that he is in trouble there--but we will see soon enough. In terms of perception, the media focus on Huckabee in New Hampshire and Michigan helped to raise his name recognition, but coming in third in those two primaries tends to color him as a perennial loser. Iowa seems like a month ago. The fresh images of Huckabee portray him as an affable also-ran.

6. South Carolina is Fred's last last chance. He seems to be surging somewhat. Will it be enough? For months I have wondered if we are waiting on a broken-down bus. Well I can hear the bus rumbling down the street blocks away. Will it arrive on cue to get us to the dance just in the nick of time?
Category: Campaign 2008.9
Posted by: A Waco Farmer
Yes, that line forms on the right, babe
Now that Macky’s back in town …
Look out … old Macky is back!!


For McCain, this must seem like deja vu all over again. After the astounding win in New Hampshire this week, he faces all the same questions he did in 2000. Can he convert his triumph in the Granite State into victories out West and down South? As before, he is comparatively low on money, and he must rise above his counter-productive popularity with the liberal-leaning mainstream media and the stigma of winning New Hampshire with the wrong voters.

Last time around, he won Michigan following New Hampshire but then met his Waterloo in South Carolina--after which, the wheels came off with disturbing rapidity.

Will history repeat itself? Will John McCain be the Ohio State of American politics?

South Carolina 2008 will not shake out exactly as it did in 2000, for this current race is so fundamentally different from eight years ago. Back then it was a two-man contest. Today there are perhaps five viable candidates--three of whom see South Carolina as a must-win (McCain, Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson).

Significantly, Romney has backed off in South Carolina for the moment--concentrating on the showdown with McCain in Michigan. Will Romney fold, if he loses Michigan? Maybe--but the Romney camp swears he will press on. We will see.

An Aside: In general, I have wondered whether Romney would stay in this race even after his own chances diminished, just to hammer McCain. That is, no matter what, would Romney remain an inexhaustible ubiquitous force in this campaign as a generic funder of anti-McCain media? But, evidently, he will not play that role in South Carolina (or Florida?)--which means there are limits to how much effort and fortune Romney is willing to expend in this campaign.

Bottom line: The other guys are going to have to pay their own freight and come up with their own anti-McCain ads. This is a huge help to McCain in the Palmetto State and good news for him in general.

Huckabee and Thompson. The media is playing up Huckabee's "southernness" and his affinity with evangelicals, who make up a large segment of Republican primary voters in South Carolina. All of this may work out just fine for Huckabee--but I would not be at all surprised if we find that South Carolinians see Arkansans as less southern than Tennesseans.

What a fool believes (speaking of myself, of course): considering the full spectrum of conservative policy positions, Fred Thompson has a chance (his absolutely last opportunity) to emerge victorious in the first southern state primary. Again, we'll see; Fred has a long way to go and a short time to get there.

One other thing, evangelicals are much more diverse and complicated than the folks who work at Rockefeller Center can ever fathom. Huckabee is not necessarily a slam dunk for conservative evangelicals in the Deep South. Remember, a significant number of southern evangelicals abandoned their fellow Baptist, Jimmy Carter, to vote for a divorced Presbyterian from Hollywood in 1980.

One last note on Fred. For the first one hundred years of American politics, candidates for president never ran for office; rather, they stood for office. That is, instead of soliciting votes personally, candidates announced that they would accept elective office as servants of the public interest, if the public so desired. Although this pose was somewhat disingenuous, candidates eschewed personal campaigns (no kissing babies, endless handshaking, or litany of promises). In theory, they waited for the electorate to find them.

Fred is running the closest thing to an old-style campaign that we have witnessed in one hundred years. It is interesting--and in this tumultuous year in which the unexpected has become the rule, his off-beat approach has a chance of working. We will see.

Can McCain win South Carolina? Yes. He is great on the war--and that is great in the South. He has Lindsey Graham--and that helps. Having said that, things are still very tough for him. The conservative establishment is still extremely antagonistic and unforgiving. As for Republican voters in general, McCain is most vulnerable on immigration. I suppose we will see how powerful that issue really resonates with the base--but McCain's defense does not stand up to much scrutiny on this subject. For a self-proclaimed straight shooter, McCain's Clintonesque reliance on a semantically slippery definition of "amnesty" does real damage to his image.

One last cheap shot at McCain (but maybe it is worth noting):

In an era in which "forty is the new thirty," forty-six year-old Barack Obama seems much younger than the forty-three year-old 1960-vintage JFK, whom we view through the prism of history and mostly gray scale images.

In contrast, in an era in which "seventy is the new sixty," John McCain looks every day his age. The oldest president ever was Ronald Reagan--but he was a movie star, who maintained his matinee idol good looks and athletic vigor for all of his public life. The seventy-one year-old McCain is craggy-faced and unhealthy looking. In this era, McCain's physical appearance and stamina could prove a significant deficit to his campaign.
Category: Campaign 2008.9
Posted by: A Waco Farmer
I am listening to Hugh Hewitt tonight.

I love Hugh Hewitt (and I like Mitt Romney okay). But Hugh is completely irrational when it comes to Mitt and this election.

He has overtly limited his callers tonight to listeners who support Romney and adamantly desire him to stay in the race. If anyone violates this rule (and expresses a dissenting opinion), they are rudely ejected off the show. All the while, after every positive call, Hewitt announces: "another vote for Romney to stay in!"

The Romney-ites are curiously and comically insistent that their man is winning this race.

The Facts: Romney is an extremely wealthy person, who built and funded a great organization, and devised a brilliant strategy. The plan: win the Iowa caucus (spending more money there than all the other candidates combined and utilizing his army of paid volunteers). From there, win the New Hampshire primary, where he was well positioned as a former governor of neighboring Massachusetts. Next capture Michigan, where his father served as a popular governor during the 1960s. These early victories would begin an avalanche of inevitability, allowing Romney to win the GOP nomination. It was a great plan—but it went awry.

He did not miss by much. Romney almost "bought the pot" in Iowa, chasing all of his big-name competitors from the field, but, in the end, he lost by nine points to an under-funded long shot, Mike Huckabee. In New Hampshire, five days later, lightening struck again when John McCain, long given up for dead, dramatically climbed out of the crypt and took the Granite State by six points. Moreover, Hewitt concedes that Romney may well come in second in Michigan next week and possibly do even worse in South Carolina after that. Nevertheless, Hewitt asserts with complete confidence that all is going according to plan (Plan B), and Romney remains in the best position to secure the nomination.

Plan B: outlast the other hopefuls and win by default.

Now that is the Audacity of Hope.

Of course, the crazy thing is that things are so chaotic that I am not ready to say that this line of thinking is completely foolish. Nobody Knows Anything. At this point in the GOP canvass, nothing is impossible. McCain and Huckabee, the presumptive frontrunners, have troubles of their own—lingering skepticism with core conservatives. Rudy is betting heavy on his ability to draw an inside-straight in Florida (the first card of his big-state strategy), and Fred is still a mystery (are we waiting on a broken-down bus?).

So, conceivably, all these candidates could run out of gas and the ever-smiling, optimistic, all-America Mitt Romney, currently running second everywhere and giving pleasantly gracious concession speeches, might be there to pick up the pieces.

I doubt it, but damn if I know…

UPDATE: The AP is reporting the Romney is pulling ads in South Carolina and Florida.
Category: Campaign 2008.9
Posted by: A Waco Farmer
Back when I was a miserably clueless high school algebra student, I spent a lot of time sitting in my seat toward the back of the classroom staring at a poster featuring a befuddled-looking monkey with this caption:

Just when I figured out all the answers, they changed all the questions.

Wow! 8:20 PM CST. With 36 percent of the precincts reporting in NH things look awfully unexpected on the Democratic Party side.

I lost count of all the "end of the Clintons" stories I read between last Thursday night and today, but it was a big number. How many total? A number approximate to the total number of pundits with access to a keyboard.

Perhaps they were a bit premature.

A Personal Aside: it was my good fortune to have been too busy (and too confused) to write such a story.

A Statistical Aside: the number of thoughtfully penned “Clinton is dead” essays over the last five days was approximately equal to the “Clinton is inevitable” essays offered with absolutely certainty two months ago.

There is a lesson here--and it is something we should all remember--and it is one of the elements of American politics that makes it the best show in town: the only thing we know for sure is that Nobody (and that goes double for me) Knows Anything.

But I think you can take this one to the bank, as I said last Friday: Fasten your seatbelts, boys; we're in for a bumpy ride.
Category: Campaign 2008.9
Posted by: A Waco Farmer
A couple of observations from the Republican debate on Saturday evening.

Obviously, all parties turned on Mitt Romney last night. Why? He has played it tough, and it was his time to take some hard shots in return. Blood is in the water. Politics is a tough game.

Nevertheless, for the first time in this campaign my heart went out to Romney. I agreed with him that the caddy remarks and tag-team taunting was unbecoming and a bit excessive.

John McCain would have us believe that his snide remarks were merely "just desserts" for the rich-boy governor who had been distorting his record. On the other hand, I am increasingly less inclined to buy McCain's victim pose. Didn't we hear the same thing from the McCain camp about George Bush back in 2000? According to the legend, all the Bushies were running around slandering the good name of the heroic senator and trotting out all the dirty tricks.

What did Romney say last night that was so bad? Even as I agree with McCain on immigration, in large part, Mr. Straight-Talk Express was playing pretty fast and loose with the facts. Hiding behind a semantically slippery definition of "amnesty" is not heroic. From what I can tell, Romney had it just about right in his characterization of McCain's record in this explosive area. McCain knows he is vulnerable on immigration, and Romney hit him where it hurt. Nothing foul about that. Politics is a tough game.

One Important note on the Democratic Race in New Hampshire. Although Hillary retains a one-point advantage in the most recent Reuters / C-SPAN / Zogby Daily Tracking Poll, this is misleading. That poll is based on a rolling canvass; that is, the latest poll reflects an average of the last three days.

However, I heard John Zogby say on C-SPAN this morning that yesterdays numbers, when taken alone, reveal an eight-point Obama advantage. This would indicate that the tide has turned in a dramatic way, which explains why the Clinton folks are running for the hills, and the pundits are predicting a crushing defeat for Mrs. Clinton in the Granite State.
Sometimes the very thing you're looking for
Is the one thing you can't see

And now we're standing face to face
Isn't this world a crazy place
Just when I thought our chance had passed
You go and save the best for last


John McCain has executed a phoenix-like comeback. Now leading in the polls in New Hampshire, he is on the verge of winning the historically meaningful "first" primary. His new-found potency, once again, incredibly, makes him a viable player in the greater race for the Republican nomination. Is the much-maligned John McCain really going to win the Republican standard in 2008?

David Brooks, Robert Novak, and Bill Kristol think so.

While confessing my admiration for McCain, and reminding readers that I had come out for McCain twenty-one months ago as a courageous and electable Reagan conservative, I wrote with confidence a few days ago that the McCain comeback would necessarily fall short.

I offered a list of five improbable events, which would need to transpire in order for the seventy-two year-old Arizona senator to emerge victorious. But I argued then, taken together, they were highly unlikely; however, yesterday I noted that "two have come to pass and, incredibly, the ice seems to be breaking on the other three."

The Five Signs of the Political Apocalypse:

1. Huckabee holds on to Iowa.

Happened. This much and more. I had expected Huck to fade a bit and Mitt Romney to prevail thinly on the strength of money, organization, and electability. Not so! Huckabee won the caucus by nine points, and he is the darling of the national press corps this weekend. On the other hand, the person McCain has always seen as his primary obstacle to victory, Mitt Romney, is staggered, bloody, and on the ropes.

2. McCain "finishes strong" (third place) in Iowa.

Miraculously, in effect, this happened also. McCain surged to finish in a statistical dead-heat with Fred Thompson for third-place in Iowa, adding to his growing sense of possibility and sapping Fred of the bounce he might have enjoyed from a solo finish in the money.

3. Independents in NH abandon Obama and other attractive fruitcakes and come out for McCain.

Of the five improbables, this one remains the most intractable. While McCain did well with independents in New Hampshire in 2000, New Hampshire independents have a lot more choices than they did then: Ron Paul, John Edwards, and, most troubling for McCain, Barack Obama.

Many pundits had averred that an Obama loss in Iowa would help McCain with independents in New Hampshire--but, alas, a triumphant Obama arrives in the Granite State with momentum, enthusiasm, and a compelling pitch for independents. One other problem for McCain and NH independents: while McCain's incredibly courageous and prescient leadership on the war in Iraq inspires rock-ribbed Republicans, I wonder whether this facet of his current political package makes him much less appealing to these independents, whoever they really are?

On the other hand, perhaps the conventional wisdom is wrong, and McCain does not really need the mysterious independents to win this race. Perhaps he is surging the old-fashioned way--which could portend more success in the aftermath of New Hampshire 2008 than in 2000. Following the shocking McCain upset eight years ago, the independent-tainted victory seemed an albatross around his neck in the ensuing primaries, serving as further proof to core Republicans that the Maverick really was not one of us.

4. At the crucial moment, the GOP establishment (conservative talk radio, blogs, non profits, etc.) experiences an epiphany, suddenly embracing "Maverick McCain" and admitting grievous error.

Within my original post a few days ago, I said: "Not in this lifetime." But, maybe so. Of all the "improbables," this would be the most ironic. It is not happening right now--but a big win in New Hampshire, which seems possible, will force conservatives to re-examine McCain. Rush has advocated for Fred Thompson as the only conservative alternative. Sean Hannity says he could accept either Rudy, Mitt, or Fred Thompson. But what if none of these candidates are around next month? Mitt is probably out. Fred is Fred (see below). Rudy is in the netherworld right now--but will likely get one more chance on the national stage as we head South (and West).

My point: alternatives to McCain are falling away. At some point, conceivably, the conservative establishment could be forced to pick between two options: McCain or Huckabee. Most likely, they pick the old hero.

5. Fred Thompson proves as lifeless as advertised.

As noted above, Fred won third, but (quoting myself from yesterday) "[h]e pulled off a surprisingly lackluster and curiously uninspiring third place. He may have, once again, done the minimum to keep himself above water in this race."

Fred is still alive--but only because there are so few other options. Let's see what happens in the big prime-time, nationally televised debate tonight on ABC--but, as always, it is now or never for Fred. He certainly could prove as "lifeless as advertised" and as insignificant as every knowledgeable person in the mainstream media seems to think. We'll see.

The Bottom Line: Does McCain have a chance? Yes. Today I think he does, but I still would not bet the house on it.