Politics - Where Logic is Checked at the Door

Just a brief foray back into politics. I watched the Iowa results sparingly last night even though I wasn't all that interested - hey, something had to fill the time during the Sugar Bowl commercials after the Bulls game ended.

With Romney's narrow win last night, commanding lead in New Hampshire, and an endorsement by John McCain it looks like only a mammoth scandal is going to keep him from the nomination at this point. Gingrich is a long way back right now in New Hampshire and I just don't think he can overcome the momentum if he loses the first two states. My recollection may be wrong, but it seems to me that when the first two states split (as in Obama/Clinton and Huckabee/McCain in 2008) then the race is still open but when one candidate sweeps both (as Gore and Kerry did in 2000 and 2004) it's pretty much over.

So it would seem like Gingrich is the big loser last night. Had Santorum won, a victory by Romney next week would signal a split and keep the race open because, despite what various political cable news shows may say to fill their around-the-clock programming, no one believes Santorum has any kind of real chance to be the nominee.

It appears that Gingrich knows this as well; as he is now out trying like hell to spin the results in his favor. To that effect, he unleashed this gem earlier today in reference to Romney:"The fact is three out of four Republicans rejected him." I'm not sure what it takes more of - balls or stupidity - to say that. Doesn't that statement just beg the question: hey Newt; where'd you finish last night? Oh, 13%? Hmm, doesn't that mean that 7 out of 8 Republicans rejected you? It's the kind of thing you say from the stump to your fervent but dejected supporters. People that aren't really going to critically assess your statement and are just looking for a reason to keep believing. Perhaps he didn't notice that in addition to those individuals there are these other people with cameras and microphones there too, and they are more than willing and able to print this nonsense and show it in the harsh light of day.

Anyway, so it's Romney. You excited about that Republicans? I've said it before and I'll say it again: this is 1996 all over again. I remember that one well because I was in the midst of interning for a Republican state rep and also was a card-carrying member of the Young Republicans. I remember being so excited after the landslide Congressional victory in 2004 and salivating as Clinton's approval numbers just continued to tank. There was blood in the water, and the Republicans were poised to strike. And then: Dole. Dole? Yes, Dole. No, surely we can come up with someone better than Dole. Nope, we can't; it's Dole. The results were predictable from there. Hell, 2004 was the exact same thing on the other side with Kerry. The fact is that a campaign that is strictly an anti-incumbency one doesn't work; if you don't excite, motivate, and mobilize the masses you will lose. End of story. Because while the answer to "do you want this guy or someone else?" is usually "someone else", the answer to "do you want this guy or that guy?" is an entirely different matter.