Gentle Reader -- You are welcome to peruse my web-based journal. I assure you that my contributions to this medium will be both infrequent and inconsequential. Read on!

IOWA, NEW HAMPSHIRE AND OTHER CHOICE JANUARY VACATION SPOTS

These contests will be held soon, and everyone turns their eyes to Planet Carlton for the definitive prediction as to the outcomes of both races. Well, here you go: I have no idea.

. . . which is really exciting! Put aside the fact that this is by all accounts a rather important election, once-in-a-generation-opportunity, blah dee blah, and we have a really close race on both sides. Democrats are split on who's best and Republicans can't seem to figure out if they can tolerate any of their choices.

But if pressed [OW!], I will make some predictions:

On the Democratic side, I predict that whomever wins Iowa and New Hampshire, even if the same person wins them both (I kind of think Hillary will do that, but I don't really know), the margins of victory will be small enough that the battle will continue deep into the primary calendar. And it really could be any one of them. I like Hillary, as I've said, but I don't want that to influence what I think will actually happen. It really could be any one of them.

I predict: Edwards in Iowa, Clinton in New Hampshire. Clinton takes it all.

The Republican side is really tough. I think this race will be decided in New Hampshire, for two reasons.

One is that I don't think Huckabee is really a serious candidate, despite his recent surge -- and that surge has almost entirely been in Iowa. Even if he beats Romney in Iowa, I don't think he has the money and organization to follow it up in NH. If that's correct, then it will be Romney and McCain (back from the dead) duking it out there. McCain is resurgent, and he won NH in 2000, and the two big papers in that state have broadcast their "Stop Romney" message . . . but I still think it will be close between those two.

The second reason that New Hampshire will be decisive is that the Republican world is very uncomfortable with this level of confusion. Their normal modus is to anoint a front-runner very early and then destroy any who dare to challenge him, of whatever party. Bush was the party pick well before the New Hampshire primary in 2000; it was only after McCain had the audacity to Straight Talk his way to victory in that state did the good Republican voters of South Carolina learn about McCain's (fictional) mulatto love child.

The Republican party is, above all, authoritarian. They want to be told which banner to wave, which slogan to scream through a bullhorn. With a commander, they are bloodthirsty stormtroopers. Without one, they are as anxious as kindergarten children who don't know which teacher can let them go to the bathroom. They want it decided, like yesterday, before they wet their collective pants.

If my theory is correct, it's bad news for Giuliani, who was counting on winning the later states -- and if my theory is correct, that was always a very bad strategy.

I predict: Romney, who will lose to the Democrat. (I think McCain would be a better president, if I had to choose, but whatever.)

So there you have it. We'll see how wrong I am in the coming weeks. posted by Carlton at 8:35 PM