The race for 2012 begins tonight

After months and months and months of GOP campaigning and debates, and a constantly changing slate of front-runners, the moment has arrived. Tonight is the Iowa Caucus, the official kick-off for the race to determine who the 2012 Republican nominee will be. I'm already worn out.
The race boils down to three factions fighting for the top spot in Iowa and the big 'mo that follows: the establishment pick (Mitt Romney), the outsider (Ron Paul) and the evangelical standard-bearer (?). As of today, it's being reported that some 40 percent of (mostly evangelical) voters are still undecided. With that big a number of undecideds, it's just about impossible to say who the top tier going into New Hampshire will be.
Conventional wisdom and polls now say former Pennsylvania Senator Rick Santorum (Flavor #5) has a strong shot at landing in the top 3 tonight. It's possible. He's put more time and effort into winning over Iowa's electorate, especially its social conservatives than any other candidate, save Ron Paul. And Iowa is known for picking religious fundamentalists with no real shot. If Santorum doesn't come in third place, at least, he's done.
It looks like it will be a showdown between Mitt Romney and Ron Paul, with the former holding a very slight lead in the polls. However, Paul's support could be underrated because many of his supporters use cell phones and aren't polled as much as older voters with landlines.
The big question is who will evangelicals support? Will they go for Santorum, who has no money and no game beyond Iowa? Will God bestow a real live miracle on Michele Bachmann's crashing campaign and keep her in the game to New Hampshire? Or will these voters coalesce around Rick Perry (who does have the machine and money to get through to Super Tuesday)?
And then there's Newt Gingrich (Flavor #4)... no matter where he winds up in tonight's total, he won't drop out. He's got books to sell and big-money speeches to make; and being a candidate gives him a spotlight PR money can't buy. He's also still, for whatever reason, polling high in states like South Carolina and Florida. Tonight could change that, though, if he fails to crack the top 4.
I predict Paul will win the Iowa Caucus with Romney coming in second. I also predict Perry will beat expectations and come in third or fourth. With an unfriendly SC primary looming, that would be Romney's biggest nightmare.

Iowa wild card: Christian conservatives

Image from Washingtonpost.com

With two weeks to go until the Jan. 3 Iowa Caucus, the great unknown in that race continues to be who evangelical Republicans will get behind. According to Boston.com, the majority of them are still undecided and torn between Ron Paul (TX), Michele Bachmann (MN) and Rick Santorum (PA).
The article did a good job of barely mentioning Rick Perry (TX), who's spending these final weeks before the Caucus on a bus tour of the state, focusing on these very voters. The media has completely written him off. That may be a mistake. If he gets in there and starts connecting with values voters on the ground, as a fellow Christian and governor, he may appeal to them far more than Paul, Bachmann and Santorum combined. He speaks their language on faith, foreign policy and limited government, has a record of executive leadership and honestly, he's not a woman (with this crowd, it does matter).
At this point every one's envisioning and girding themselves for a Paul upset in Iowa. For good reason. He's got a lock on the ground game and the most passionate supporters. At the same time, all the big guns are blazing away at Mitt Romney and Newt Gingrich for epic flip-floppery and corruption, destroying voters' trust in them and cancelling each other out.
If evangelicals decide at the last minute that Paul is too off his nut on foreign policy and Bachmann and Santorum are just too weak, they could easily coalesce around the candidate that most comprehensively appeals to their vision of a leader - that male, conservative Christian, Southern governor. At this point, a win for Perry in Iowa isn't just possible, it would be the biggest upset of all.

Romney snags endorsement from the Des Moines Register

Photo by Darren McCollester/Getty Images North America

I don't know what's more exciting, Christine "I'm not a witch" O'Donnell's endorsement of Mitt Romney or the one he just got from Iowa's largest newspaper, the Des Moines Register. The paper acknowledges it didn't endorse Romney in 2008, but that was then and this is now. Now it's all about his "sobriety, wisdom and judgement." This year it's "a different field" (read: full of pandering psychos) and he's matured as a candidate. The paper tries weakly to explain away his myriad flip-flops by claiming he's evolved politically - and besides, they all do it! In closing ranks with the establishment, they argue Newt Gingrich is an alienating, unelectable bomb thrower and Ron Paul would bring about "economic chaos and isolationism." While they may be right about Gingrich and Paul, it's still fun to watch the establishment squirm over the possibility of Dr. No taking Iowa. It would be the right-leaning version of  OWS, occupying the Iowa Caucuses. There would be no greater discombobulation. And if that happens, expect the MSM to go into collective hyperdrive to (a.) diminish the Iowa victory by claiming the Caucuses no longer matter and (b.) by going "Dean Scream" on Paul to shut down his momentum. Here's the memo to come: He can't win! He can't win! He can't win! Got it?

Newt/Romney a lock on Iowa? Don't bet on it

Image: http://marketplace.publicradio.org/display/web/2011/09/08/am-the-republican-debate-social-security-and-minimum-wage/

As we get closer to the Iowa Caucuses Jan. 3, most folks are laser-focused on the slug fest that is Newt/Romney. I blame the political chatteratti for that. They conveniently forget there are a few other contenders in the race. The race could go down as predicted by most polls, showing Mitt Romney's support crashing and Newt Gingrich's surging from Iowa to Florida. But then again, being the strange and volatile season it is, other weirdness could ensue.
Take Ron Paul. His rising poll numbers in Iowa now have him in second place. His base is probably the most passionate and his ground operation is well-organized and strong. He's also been making a lot of noise with a great TV ad campaign that appeals to young voters and skeptics of Newt/Romney. Dr. No may be one of the oldest guys to ever run, but the kids love him. He shouldn't be underestimated in Iowa.
Then there's Rick Perry. Most everyone in the media has written him off because of his gaffes and space-outs. Sure, that dopey behavior puts off the elites and freaks out a lot of regular folks who still watch the news. But in Iowa, and especially South Carolina, those aren't exactly the voters Rick Perry is gunning for. Unlike Romney and Gingrich, his primary focus from now until Jan. 3 will be winning over the Hawkeye state's Christian conservatives. They are legion. If they decide they can't trust Romney and that Gingrich is too foul, Perry seems far more likely to be their candidate. And if he takes Iowa, he probably takes SC, too.
Then there's Jon Huntsman and New Hampshire. He's put all of his eggs into that crazy, independent basket. Who can really know which way Granite state voters will go? Not even the Magic 8-Ball has an answer for that one.
I know this much, if Paul or Perry pulls an upset in Iowa and Huntsman comes in first or second in New Hampshire, it will throw the race and entire media narrative into a realm of political weirdness we have not witnessed in decades. If political junkies thought the race between Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton in 2008 was epic, they could be in for yet another nominating spectacle for the ages if the battle goes down to a brokered convention in Tampa.
I'm tempted to bet 10 Large Perry winds up with the nomination.

House bill could make diplomacy with Iran illegal

The Orwellian/NeoCon nonsense continues. Reps. Dennis Kucinich (D-OH) and Pete Stark (D-CA) warned colleagues in a letter that the Iran Threat Reduction Act (H.R. 1905), expected to pass this week, would make it illegal for U.S. officials to negotiate with Iranian officials in certain cases. In Nov., Congressman Ron Paul (R-TX) also warned that "the sanctions against Iran mandated by this legislation are definite steps toward a US attack on Iran."

Andrew Sullivan sums up tonight's debate quick-like

"10.54 pm. Tapper is playing up the $10,000 Romney bet - and I suspect he's right to. It leapt out at me, along with the "Newt Romney" line from Bachmann. Other than that, Newt wins; Romney loses; Paul rises. Have yourself a shot. I sure will."
A few thoughts of my own...
I predict Romney's glib $10k bet offer to Perry will be the equivalent of George H.W. Bush's epic space-out on the price of a gallon of milk. We all remember how that turned out. Just to drive that point home, Jon Huntsman, who was MIA tonight, bought www.10KBet.com. Can't wait to see what they do with that.
Romney went into this race desperately needing to neutralize Newt Gingrich's new front runner status. Instead, he received a knock-out blow from Gingrich at the very beginning when the former House Speaker reminded voters that Romney would've been a career politician if only he could've gotten elected.
Ron Paul did well and got much applause, but as usual, the talking heads refused to acknowledge it. The political press is mind-numbingly predictable. He's polling in second place right now in Iowa. I'd pay good money to see the look on the faces of a dumbstruck intelligentsia if Dr. No actually pulls a Huckabee and wins the Iowa Caucus.
Rick Perry did better than expected tonight. He gave good, heartfelt answers to two important questions re: character (if you lie to your spouse, who won't you lie to?) and where he came from (modest beginnings). As doofy as he is, I've been saying that it's foolish to count him out just yet. With an upcoming Iowa bus tour, he could still win the coveted Christian vote. As for Bachmann and Santorum, their role tonight was useful, but I doubt it'll do them any good.

ABC News-Iowa GOP debate: Will the real front-runner please stand up?

With the fur now flying between the Romney, Gingrich and Paul campaigns, tonight's ABC News,Yahoo News, WOI-TV, Des Moines Register, Iowa Republican Party debate should be very entertaining. With the Iowa Caucus just weeks away, the stakes are higher than ever.
Questions to ponder while we wait for the fun to begin... will there be an open bar? Will a desperate Mittens locate his cajones and go after Newt face-to-face for screwing up his front-runner status by reminding everyone about his voluminous record of ethics violations and personal scandals? Will Newt drop the "I'm above it" act and go medieval on Mittens by rubbing his flip-floppery in his face like a dog's nose in poo? Will they both make each other look so petty and stupid that Ron Paul actually gains his opening to win the Caucus? (He is right up there with them in the polls.) What kind of Bush-league buffoonery will Rick Perry bring tonight? Will Jon Huntsman's rich daddy buy him some air time? And, will anyone notice those other two clowns still hanging around?
Seriously, I can only hope moderators Diane Sawyer and George Stephanopoulos give Gingrich a good grilling over his recent comments regarding his disdain for child labor laws and saying that Palestinians are an invented people. I also hope she questions Mittens over why, as outgoing MA governor, he and his staff bought all those hard drives and scrubbed whatever records they could, as well as making him defend his record of ever-shifting positions. It would also be nice to hear Paul questioned over what he would do as president in his first 100 days in office, should he be nominated and beat President Barack Obama. I know, I know... it'll never happen. I'd still love to hear what Dr. No's big plan would be, just the same.
The debate is being held on the campus of Drake University in Des Moines and starts at 9 p.m. Eastern/8 p.m. Central. To watch, tune into ABC TV or watch the live-stream at ABCNews.com, Yahoo.com, MyABC5.com or DesMoinesRegister.com.

Word association game - GOP primary edition



Photo: Aikenstandard.com

Instead of wasting time writing a detailed analysis of where today's GOP contenders stand, I've opted to go the simple route. A variation on word association. Why not? Since this is the most intellectually-challenged group of presidential nominees I've ever seen in my life, it's best to keep it simple. So here we go!

Mitt Romney: Can't buy me love
Newt Gingrich: Icarus
Rick Perry: Second coming of Dubya
Michele Bachmann: Delusional
Herman Cain: Not ready for prime time
Jon Huntsman: Better luck next time
Ron Paul: Still no chance
Rick Santorum: Yah right!
Buddy Roemer: Error message
Gary Johnson: File not found



Who really chooses our presidential candidates?



Image: Adam

Former Bush political strategist Matthew Dowd brings up a question many of us have been asking for a long time - why are certain qualified presidential candidates excluded from the debates [former Republican governors Buddy Roemer (LA) and Gary Johnson (NM)] and given far less time in them when they (Ron Paul) clearly have just as much of a shot or better than some of those who are there? Establishment parrots always say Ron Paul doesn't have a shot at the nomination. How would they know? They've never given voters a chance to make that decision. Paul's poll numbers have been high and he has a larger following than Michele Bachmann, Newt Gingrich, Rick Santorum, Herman Cain and Jon Huntsman combined. His fundraising ability also leaves theirs (collectively) in the dust.
The only sensible answer is that some candidates are acceptable to the establishment and some are not. And big media does its best to serve those interests. So, it becomes a self-fulfilling prophecy. If the system wasn't rigged in this way, Paul would get as much air time in debates as Mitt Romney, Roemer and Johnson would be included in the debates and it would be left up to the voters to decide who's viable and who isn't.
The way it is, it's no wonder so many people don't trust big media. Why should they? It can't even come up with a plausible excuse as to why it ignores candidates who might actually just steal the show. When it comes to experience in governing, independence and common sense, Paul, Roemer and Johnson are all head and shoulders above the current crop of candidates (Huntsman excluded). But then, that's probably what makes them so unacceptable to the powers-that-be.

Image source