04 January 2008

More hirsute political analysis from the frozen steppes of Iowa

Yes, you heard it here first. Or at least you would have if anyone read this insignificant slice of tripe. Obama wins Iowa with Edwards nosing out Clinton, while Huck musses up Mitt’s hair of inevitability with a 34% noogie courtesy of Iowa’s churchgoers.

Not that all this means much of anything. It’s just a first chapter, and an oddly constructed one at that, in an intense and condensed process. I don’t expect Hillary to fold quickly, and Edwards should play well in New Hampshire and beyond too.

My man Richardson is playin’ up his 1.7% finish as “
making the final four”. He’ll need to improve that a tad bit to survive beyond next week. I’d humbly suggest that if he doesn’t reach at least the 15% mark and make this a 4-Dem race, he’s off the table and workin’ the VP angle for real.

(By the by, farewell Messers Biden and Dodd. Both of y’all would’ve been great guys in the White House if only you’d’ve been a tad bit more interesting.)

A couple interesting results not being played up amid all the noise of voter turnout, young 1st-time voters, and evangelical yayhoos:

Heisted from the
Daily Kos, an interesting look at the results en toto (I believe just invented that latinish sounding phrase so don’t go lookin’ for it in Wikipedia.): If you look at all the voters combined (all 356,000 of ‘em, R & D & I & L), the results read:

Obama 24.5%
Edwards 20.5%
Clinton 19.8%
Huckabee 11.4%

I know it’s not a square-up comparison ‘cuz caucusing rules vary by party and you’re only choosing a candidate in one party. But it’s interesting, no, that the top dog Republican gathers only 11% of everyone who slogged their way through the fallow cornfields. It’s kinda like the Colorado Rockies emerging victorious from a pathetic National League field just so they can lose to any of the top 3 or 4 AL teams.

Another interesting result (though not really pointed out quite yet in the press…again you hear it here first) is that of Dems, 68% of ‘em chose candidates who idealize change and progressive new directions in Obama and Edwards over the political establishment’s cautious status quo and Hillary’s barely 29%. I’m guessing here that if/when Obama or Edwards have to fold, their voters will slide more easily towards each other rather than to the stolid, cautious, DC establishment-propped Hillary.

Predictions for next week? Hillary gets ugly with both Obama and Edwards ‘cuz she has to win. I’m guessing, here and now, she doesn’t win New Hampshire either, not with Obama’s message, momentum, and money. She should do well enough to edge Mr Edwards, narrowly, enabling the Dems to maintain the 3some for a while longer. Governor Bill slips upwards to perhaps 6 yet not more than 10%, just not enough to matter, but retaining his floppy gravitas to serve us entertainingly somehow, somewhere in the near future.

The R’s? A 3-way nastiness ensues between Mitt, Huck, and McCain. Ron Paul could be interesting in NH with its “Live Free or Die” sympathies, but not interesting enough to make a difference. Giuliani? Fred? They’ll continue on past NH but nobody knows quite why.

Enjoy the primary season goofiness. This’ll all be over in less than a month. We’ll have a short breathing period to concern ourselves with Britney’s next rehab and terrifying tiger tales before the real-life intensity of the national campaign commences in earnest come spring.

No comments: