Musings on the ongoing campaign

A few truly hilarious things have taken place since our last blog post, the first being this. Yes, this is an official video from the Mike Huckabee campaign. And yes, that is Chuck Norris with him. And yes, it is awesome. We’ve been operating under the assumption that Huckabee might be following a Fred Thompson-esque path: riding on a vague and somewhat unfounded hype until he is really thrust into the spotlight at which point his candidacy makes a stark downward spiral. But Huckabee certainly seems to be more substantive (both as a politician and a human being) than Fred Thompson. Maybe even more importantly, he seems to be more likable—which could go a long way in the early election states like Iowa. When there aren’t very large policy differences between major Republican candidates (Ron Paul doesn’t count), good-humored ole Mike Huckabee’s laid-back charm and sunny-side-up optimism could be a real draw for voters especially when he is juxtaposed with the more curmudgeony, glib or smarmy types next to him during the debates (read: Thompson, Romney and Giuliani, respectively). A recent poll shows Huckabee to be making real gains in Iowa. The question now is whether he can weather the attacks that accompany a top-tier status and (maybe even more importantly), whether his rise in poll numbers, media attention and recognition can translate into a rise in fundraising. Even if he does pull off a victory in Iowa, he’ll need the cash to sustain the electoral momentum it garners him. (On a side note, we can’t really decide how we feel about Mike Huckabee…on the one hand, he appears—for lack of a better word—to be a nice guy. But on the other hand, he doesn’t like gay people and doesn’t really believe in evolution…so there’s that.)

Speaking of Republican ads, Tom Tancredo dropped a real doozy on the Iowa television-watching public recently. If you haven’t seen this ad, please brace yourself because it is—what’s the word? Oh, spineless, misguided and awful. Tancredo prefaces the ad by announcing “I’m Tom Tancredo and I support this message because someone has to say it.” Really? Does someone have to say it? Because maybe it’s better not to say it. There is a real debate to be had over immigration—how to treat those who are already here illegally, the economic and cultural benefits/deterrents of immigration in general, how to logistically deal with our border problem. But it requires the use of insanity or monkey poop for brains to surmise that the threat of terrorism and our poor regulation of our Southern border have any direct link. Then again, Tom Tancredo is the man who did say “If we have another event like 911 perpetrated by someone coming across the border illegally, that would do something.”

And finally speaking of perhaps the craziest person of all, this happened. Yes it is funny. But it’s also somewhat revealing. Everyone has always found something to be out of place with Dennis Kucinich. For one, he looks like the Keebler elf. Secondly, he consistently insists on running for president even though he has no chance in hell of winning. And third, his wife is kind of hot and the size of Yao Ming relative to him. So maybe this explains all of these oddities. What if Dennis Kucinich is himself, in fact, an alien (from Outer space, not Mexico)? He might be using extraterrestrial technology to brainwash his constituents in Ohio, increase his political longevity and seduce his wife. And it also might explain why he is in his 60’s and still looks like the Beaver.

Handicapping the Iowa

Le Tas has yet to make a blog post.

Le Tas is weak. He always has been. And he always will be.

Democrats get dirty

It would appear that the gloves are finally coming off in the Democratic presidential race and that the camaraderie and hippie love that characterized the initial stages of the race have been replaced by combat and vitriol. Barack Obama promised, in an interview with the Times, that he would sharpen his criticism of the frontrunner, Hillary Clinton, but it was really John Edwards who lobbied the harshest criticism against the New York Senator. The question is will these attacks work? Are they too little too late? And how will infighting among the leading Democrats affect their chances in 2008--regardless of which candidate they ultimately endorse.

The attacks certainly are not too little; if anything Edwards and Obama are slathering on the criticism, condemning every aspect of Senator Clinton's candor and campaign. Her general electability has been called into question, her vague skirting of direct answers to questions has been noted and her honesty and sincerity have been assaulted. And rightly so, we think. The Clinton campaign has been premised upon not giving any soundbites or inches for rivals to jump on or Youtube to viralize. Consequently, she has been guarded to the point of obfuscation. As cliche as it sounds, people deserve some frank and honest answers following an administration that has propogated secrecy and vaguery.

The way that Edwards and Obama have gone about tackling the issue is the tricky part, however. No one wants to slip into smarmy personal attacks (lest the incur the flubbery wrath of Bill Richardson), but the issue--for Obama in particular--is how to make substantive criticism without appearing desperate and/or caustic. People have been looking for teeth and muscle from Obama, not just "sharpened criticism" or platform distinctions. But he runs a serious risk of appearing hypocritical, of abandoning "the politics of hope" for a more negative, "politics as usual" approach. And that is where John Edwards comes in. Despite some cries that Obama underachieved in the last debate, that he delivered far less bite than was promised, he was able to remain afloat above the verbal combat while still lodging some serious complaints concerning Clinton. It was Edwards who did the dirty work and Obama who came out unscathed. This could oddly end up working like Bush has campaigned in the past: sending out Dick Cheney to make the truly nasty attacks while he remains positive, upbeat, "compassionately conservative." By kneecaping Clinton, Edwards might end up sending discouraged moderates towards Obama, rather than himself. Only time and polls will tell.