On-the-Job Training

"I have had a strong and a long relationship on national security, I've been involved in every national crisis that this nation has faced since Beirut, I understand the issues, I understand and appreciate the enormity of the challenge we face from radical Islamic extremism. I am prepared. I am prepared. I need no on-the-job training. I wasn't a mayor for a short period of time. I wasn't a governor for a short period of time."

-- Senator John McCain, October, 2007



Sarah Palin held the post of mayor of Wasilla for less time than Rudy Giuliani headed New York City. And her gubernatorial stint in Alaska is shorter than that of Mitt Romney's in Massachusetts.

One Very Off Moment

A very poignant thought from Andrew Sullivan:

The one moment that stays with me tonight, oddly enough, was not Palin's speech. It was a line from Giuliani, a New York mayor with a young third wife and gay friends, mocking a "cosmopolitan" who was brought up by a single mother. It was that Barack Obama's rise could "only happen in America." And it was designed to mock him, the first African-American candidate for the presidency of the United States.

I won't forget that.

Random Thoughts...

As the plot of the Democratic primary twists and turns, Barack Obama’s upper-hand is becoming more and more prominent. As he's swept the table the past few weeks, Democrats have turned out in record numbers on his behalf, often dwarfing the turnout of Republicans in the reddest of states. In those states (such as Nebraska and Kansas), Obama is winning and he's winning big - with 7 out of 10 votes cast. If nothing else speaks to the transformational aspects of his candidacy, that does.

Looking to the general election, it’s apparent that Obama brings a 50-state campaign to the table, while Clinton has reportedly planned out her entire 271 electoral vote strategy. Change versus politics as usual. Well, Americans are tired of presidents who only govern on behalf of their supporters. If the Clinton campaign is any indication (victory above all else and damn the consequences), she will govern much the same way. Despite her "vast experience", she fails to comprehend the nation's desperate yearning for change.

To become the president we need – one who leads and truly inspires - a candidate must first have the ability to connect with voters outside of his/her political base. Unity brings strength, pride, and change...remember? Division breeds contempt, apathy, and paralysis. More and more Americans, tired of the latter, are looking to Obama to provide the former. The polls numbers reflect as much.

On the heels of an Obama sweep of the Potomac primaries, the Clinton campaign is in danger of adopting the Giuliani strategic focus on distant goalposts. But as Rudy knows too well, as those goalposts move closer, the subsequent momentum of the Obama campaign could make Clinton's task insurmountable. Thus the firewalls are set in states like Ohio, Pennsylvania, and Texas. At that point, it could very well be all or nothing for the Clinton campaign – a campaign that has recently relied on a $5 million loan from its candidate, and a campaign that must compensate for the resignations of its campaign manager and deputy campaign manger. The writing is on the wall but if we’ve learned anything from this campaign, it is that voters tend to reject the “inevitable” candidate and that Hillary Clinton is at her best when the tide is against her. The tide has officially turned and soon it'll be time to put those lessons to the ultimate test.

The Tanking of Rudy

"Five days before his make-or-break primary, all that last year's national front-runner has to show for the love he's given the Sunshine State is a diminished standing." On the Times blog, Timothy Egan comments on the travails of Rudy Giuliani in Florida. An excerpt:

For 50 days, Giuliani has had the Sunshine State nearly to himself. In advance of the presidential primary on Jan. 29, he’s sucked up to the Cuban vote in Miami, pandered in Cape Canaveral about the space program, tried to scare retirees over early-bird specials in South Florida. There he is riding in a fire truck in a Miami parade, trailed by angry firefighters who blame him for multiple failures when New York was attacked. There he is in the Panhandle, the consummate Yankees fan trying to look down-home on the Redneck Riviera. And every night, his campaign phone bank reaches out to the diaspora of 1.5 million transplanted New Yorkers. Start spreading the news – quick!

Yet, the more they see of him here, the more his poll numbers tank. Even with ol’ Fred Thompson shuffling off the stage for a life of longer naps and witless homilies to more appreciative audiences, Rudy’s campaign is in a meltdown.

Thompson Comes Out Swinging

As Slate reports, the most noteworthy aspect of last night's debate was that Fred Thompson finally came out swinging.

No one got teary-eyed at the Republican debate in South Carolina Thursday night, but Fred Thompson did try to make Mike Huckabee cry. Early in the 90-minute event, Thompson laid out a bill of complaints about Huckabee's heresies on tax cuts, immigration, and foreign policy. He went after him several more times during the night accusing Huckabee of political expediency and cluelessness about the Pakistani military. The governor didn't represent "the model of the Reagan coalition," said Thompson, but the "model of the Democratic Party." That crack may seem a little weak on the page, but given that Thompson normally proceeds like cold syrup, his consistently aggressive posture was as striking as if he'd broken out into jumping jacks.

In the Republican primary, the battle lines are clearly being drawn. With Romney focused on Michigan and Giuliani focused on Florida, Huckabee, McCain and Thompson are left to fight it out in South Carolina. The bad news for Huckabee is that Thompson and McCain are former colleagues and old friends. And as the futility of the Thompson campaign becomes more apparent, he'll undoubtedly throw his support to McCain in an attempt to bolster his old friend's credibility with the conservative establishment. Last night was a good indication that it may already be happening.

Too Little, Too Late?

While the Giuliani strategy of laying low until Florida could still work theoretically, it's going to be tough for him to become relevant again. His opponents have shared the media spotlight for the past month so he's essentially competing in a race in which each of his competitors have a running start. That's why we're starting to see Huckabee close quickly in Florida. To counter, Giuliani unveiled a new ad today.

The Caucus Breakdown: The Morning After

Stuart Rothenberg analyzes the winners and losers from last night:

Iowa Winners

1. Barack Obama. The easiest pick of the night, Obama’s win means that he goes to New Hampshire as a winner. No, the Democratic contest is not over, but if he wins in the Granite State, he’ll be hard to stop in South Carolina. And if he sweeps those three, he may never look back.Entrance polling showed Iowa Democrats responded strongly to Obama’s message of change – half of Democrats said that the top quality they were looking for in a candidate was his or her ability to bring about change, and of those respondents, 51 percent voted for Obama. The Illinois Democrat’s campaign also clearly benefited from the surge in Democratic turnout and from the participation of Iowans who had never before caucused. Obama won among caucus-goers who said the war was the top issue, as well as among those who identified the economy or health care as the most important issue. He won “very liberal” and “somewhat liberal” Democratic caucus attendees handily, and nosed out Clinton among self-described moderates. All in all, an impressive performance.

2. Mike Huckabee. In May, Huckabee wasn’t even on the radar screen in Iowa. At the end of the day, he was outspent, and he won what is always regarded as an “organizational race” without much of an organization. Huckabee clobbered the rest of the GOP field on two key candidate qualities: “shares my values” and “says what he believes.” That’s a good place to start when you are running for your party’s Presidential nomination. But Huckabee did as well as he did on Thursday only because of the make-up of Thursday’s Republican caucus-goers. The former Arkansas Governor won the caucuses because he cleaned up among the most conservative and most religious attendees. Six out of ten GOP caucus-goes were evangelicals, and he won them 46 percent to 19 percent over Mitt Romney. Among the 36 percent of GOP attendees who said that the religious beliefs of the candidates matter “a great deal,” Huckabee won 56 percent – five times more than Romney, McCain or Thompson. But New Hampshire doesn’t look like natural Huckabee territory, and the Arkansas Republican’s long-term prospects in the race are not as bright as they may look today.

3. John McCain. Sure, McCain finished essentially tied for third with Fred Thompson, but Romney’s less than sterling showing could dry up some of the former Massachusetts governor’s support in New Hampshire, and that could boost McCain’s prospects on Tuesday. The only problem for the Arizona Republican: If the Obama bandwagon draws even more Granite State Independents into the Democratic primary, depriving McCain of potential supporters.

4. Rudy Giuliani. The win by Huckabee means that the GOP race is as confused as ever, and that’s a plus for the former New York City mayor, who benefits from confusion in the early contests. Giuliani’s chances for the Republican nomination don’t look all that bright, but he would have been much worse off if Romney had won in Iowa.

Iowa Losers

1. John Edwards. Anyone who listened to Edwards’s caucus night speech had to be asking, “What’s he smoking?”After drawing 32 percent in the 2004 caucuses and spending the next four years camped out in the state, Edwards finished essentially tied for second on Thursday. To make matters worse, the other “change” candidate in the contest, Barack Obama, finished first. And, Obama’s optimistic change message trumped Edwards’s angry, populist message. Edwards, who railed against corporate greed, focused on jobs and trade and aimed his message at the “little guy,” lost union households to both Clinton and Obama. Edwards will now have major resource problems, and he isn’t likely to do well in New Hampshire. If his comments last night are any indication, he isn’t likely to go quietly. But the former North Carolina senator is in serious trouble. He needed to win in Iowa, and he didn’t. It’s just that simple.

2. Hillary Rodham Clinton. Clinton’s problem isn’t that Edwards nosed her out for second; it’s that caucus attendees preferred change over experience, raising questions about her fundamental appeal. The calendar isn’t her friend over the next month, and she’ll be peppered with process questions when she’d rather talk about things that voters want to hear. Nobody should count the New York senator out. Iowa, after all, is just a single state, and Clinton and Obama ran virtually even among self-described Democrats in Iowa, which offers her hope in true closed primary states. But Clinton no longer is in the driver’s seat, as indicated by the fact that she lost women, 35 percent to 30 percent, to Obama in the caucuses.

3. Mitt Romney. How do you go from a prohibitive favorite in the Iowa caucuses to a surprisingly distant runner-up to Mike Huckabee? Ask Romney. He did it. Romney won with upscale Republicans, more moderate and urban GOP caucus-goers and those for whom the religious beliefs of the candidate didn’t matter a lot. But he got swamped by conservative evangelicals who wouldn’t vote for a Mormon. He won’t have that problem in New Hampshire, but he has a different one there: John McCain.Romney needs a win in the Granite State or in Michigan to stay in the hunt. One of his biggest problems is that caucus attendees didn’t think that “he says what he believes.”

The Caucus Breakdown

Chuck Todd provides a thoughtful breakdown of the potential outcomes of the Iowa Caucuses and what they would mean to the various candidates.

In summary, John Edwards has to win because he has invested so much time and effort in the state over the last few years. A loss would be devastating. Because of the resources at their disposal, both Clinton and Obama need to win but could stomach a loss. Meanwhile, Richardson, Biden and Dodd are fighting for 4th place. Finshing behind the Big 3 would be considered a victory while anything less would make their campaigns more irrelevant and most likely knock them out of the race.

A win for Huckabee would obviously be huge but, considering the amount of time and money spent by Romney in Iowa, he could also declare victory with a strong 2nd place finish. A win by Romney gives him momentum going into New Hampshire while a 2nd place finish would shift that momentum over to a surging McCain (who will be rooting hard for Huckabee) in New Hampshire and South Carolina. A respectable showing by McCain ("north of 15%") would be considered a victory for a candidate who hasn't put much effort into the state. And the only thing keeping Thompson in the race would be a top 3 finish and if that doesn't happen, he will likely throw his support to McCain.

It's still muddled but I can see some possible trends developing. The significant outcome of the Democratic Caucus will be the fate of Edwards and to whom the third tier candidates will shift their support. My guess is an Obama victory in Iowa, followed closely by Edwards and Clinton in a near statistical tie. Biden comes in a strong 4th followed by Richardson and then Dodd.

On the Republican side, it seems more clear. Huckabee wins in Iowa, followed by Romney then McCain (at around 17%), Thompson, Paul then Giuliani. Thompson then drops out and endorses McCain, who then crusises to a victory over a staggered Romney in New Hampshire and South Carolina. Romney has to bow out and Giuliani's irrelevance in the early states prevents him from competing with a surging McCain. McCain then outlasts Huckabee, who has a more difficult time winning with less resources and in states with smaller Evangelical populations. Soon after, Huckabee bows out and is picked as a running mate by McCain who attempts to shore up support from the Republican base.

"The War Over the Wonks"

The Washington Post provides an interesting list of the "national security and foreign policy advisers to the leading presidential candidates from both parties". While Hillary has garnered support from many of the Democratic establishment figures such as Albright, Holbrooke and Berger, it's interesting how many high-ranking former Administration officials now endorse Obama, including Clinton National Security Advisor Anthony Lake and Carter National Security Adbvisor Zbigniew Brzezinski. On the Republican side, the neo-cons have hedged their bets on Giuliani, while McCain has the support of the Republican Party establishment, which includes everyone from moderates like Brent Scowcroft and Colin Powell to dubious Nixonites such as Alexander Haig and Henry Kissinger.

Political Transformation in Iowa

Former Bush speechwriter, Michael Gerson, comments on the recent endorsement of Mike Huckabee by Jim Gilchrist. Gilchrist is founder of the Minuteman Project, an activist anti-immigrant organization that many have called a hate group or, at the very least, a xenophobic organization that espouses intolerance and relies upon the exploitation of American fears and insecurities.

While many would spur, or at least blush from, Gilchrist’s endorsement, the Huckabee campaign has fully embraced it. The candidate who speaks of bringing together, the candidate with reasonable and humane stances on immigration as Governor, again shuns his principles for political expediency by further kowtowing to the Republican base that will ultimately derail his message and his entire campaign. Gerson writes:

I am predisposed to like Mike Huckabee for his commitment to economic mobility, his firm but nonjudgmental social conservatism and his Christian concern for the poor. But Huckabee's embrace of Gilchrist and his recent shifts on immigration policy undermine the core of his appeal: authenticity. From the G-rated, family-values candidate, this is the kind of politics that should be covered with brown paper, kept under the counter and hidden from children.

Gilchrist is not just another voice on immigration. He is one of the most divisive figures in the most divisive debate in American politics. In 2006, responding to pro-immigration demonstrations, he told the Orange County Register, "I'm not going to promote insurrection, but if it happens, it will be on the conscience of the members of Congress who are doing this. I will not promote violence in resolving this, but I will not stop others who might pursue that." Note the oily formulation -- not promoting, but also not criticizing, the resort to political violence. "I'm willing to see my country go into battle if necessary," he added, "for our sovereignty and to be governed by rule of law."

Gilchrist has called for the impeachment of President Bush over the issue of border enforcement. He has made noises about running for president as a third-party candidate because of his disdain for Republicans. This is an odd choice of company for a candidate who promotes a conservatism without anger.

…Huckabee has accompanied his choice of new friends with an immigration plan that would require 12 million illegal immigrants to return home before applying for permanent status -- a completely unrealistic approach borrowed from anti-immigration activists. Huckabee's campaign regards this evolution as immunization against Mitt Romney's immigration attack ads -- and it may work in the short run. But a political shift this transparent raises questions about the quality and seriousness of Huckabee's campaign.

Huckabee's main appeal has been his homespun decency. But his behavior on immigration has been a kind of politics-as-usual so blatant it is actually unusual. Huckabee is managing to compromise his most distinctive virtue at the very moment the attention of the public is focused on his candidacy. In politics, a candidate can bend over backward so far that his spine snaps.

I can’t help but think that the blatant pandering of Huckabee, Romney and Giuliani to the Republican base will ultimately leave the door wide open for a John McCain resurgence.