| Mitt Romney Gets Squeezed
I am still processing the impact of John McCain’s victory
in yesterday’s Florida Republican Primary. Having written
recently about the likelihood of a battle between Rudy Giuliani and Mike Huckabee for third place in the state, I was particularly interested to observe the fallout from that match-up. Given that Giuliani had staked the future of his campaign on a victory in Florida, I am not surprised to see that his third-place finish is sufficient to drive him from the race. But Huckabee using his fourth-place showing as a springboard
into next Tuesday’s large slate of contests is another matter.
Add/View CommentsBush Sets the Foreign Policy Table
All of this is bad news for Mitt Romney. Giuliani’s imminent
endorsement of McCain will help the Senator with moderate GOP'ers and independents on the coasts, in places like New York, New Jersey and California, and Huckabee’s decision to stick around will hurt Romney with religious conservatives in states like Alabama, Georgia, Missouri, Oklahoma, and Tennessee. Romney’s best hope in recent weeks has been the possibility of an eventual head-to-head match-up with McCain, in which social conservatives finally coalesce around his candidacy. Both Giuliani and Huckabee have now complicated that scenario significantly, each in his own way.
Heading into his seventh and final State of the Union address
last night, President Bush was certainly in no enviable position for a politician. But, despite his circumstance as an unpopular
president defending an unpopular
war, while facing a potential recession at the end of two long terms in office, Bush was no less passionate on Iraq, Iran, and the Global War on Terror than he has been in past addresses. These policies form the ideological core of his presidential legacy, and they will set the table for voters in November, with one of the starkest foreign policy choices in recent memory.
For anyone following the Republican presidential race, it should be abundantly clear by now that all of the candidates (except Ron Paul, of course) strongly support President Bush’s worldview on these issues. They may quibble about how the Administration has managed its efforts, but they have offered no public disavowals of the core tenets of Bush foreign policy. In contrast, anyone watching the Democratic presidential contest should realize by now that those candidates seek to dismantle Bush foreign policy. They may argue over how quickly this can be accomplished in Iraq, but there is no disagreement about the ultimate goal.
So, President Bush’s speech last night was really about firmly drawing a bright partisan line in the proverbial policy sand one final time. Now, we must all wait until November, to learn on which side of that line the next president will stand.
Add/View CommentsThe State of Our Union is...
You can hear more of my take on last night’s State of the Union address here
Add/View CommentsTwo for the Price of One
I am going to briefly shift gears over the next 24 hours, in order to reflect a bit on President Bush’s final State of the Union address, taking place at 9 p.m. tonight. Tomorrow morning, I will be a guest on New Hampshire Public Radio’s The Exchange
, to participate in a wrap-up of the evening. You can listen to the show live here
(lower left) at 9 a.m., or catch it later here
. Tomorrow night, it’s back to Florida
Add/View CommentsDo Not Adjust Your Television
For those of you who were as fascinated as I was by Bill and Hillary Clinton’s controversial
tag team performance in South Carolina last week, here is an interesting piece
by historian Garry Wills, from Saturday’s New York Times
, on why the Founders decided against the idea of a plural executive when framing our system of government. I am sure that I was not the only one riveted by the unusual sight of Bill Clinton, rather than Hillary, first conceding South Carolina to Barack Obama on national television Saturday night.
One of the central criticisms of adopting
a single national primary day to pick presidential nominees is that having all voters select their preferred candidate on the same day would reduce democratic deliberation. Critics
argue that it would force campaigns to rely heavily on television advertising (and fundraising) nationwide, rather than on more traditional forms of retail politics in a series of individual states.
Add/View CommentsThe Republicans Pause for Tea
Well, as the New York Times notes
today, we are now getting our first glimpse of what a post-retail nominee selection process might look like, as the Democratic candidates roll out their essentially national ad campaigns in the many primary and caucus states simultaneously holding contests on February 5th
. So, for those of you in the roughly two dozen affected states, try on a national primary for the next 10 days, and let me know how it feels.
If, as suggested
previously, the Republican presidential race in Florida is shaping up to be a contest between John McCain and Mitt Romney, then nothing that occurred at last night’s mellow
debate in Boca Raton is likely to change that scenario. It may be that, in the wake of Monday’s tumultuous
Democratic debate in South Carolina, the Republican candidates were hesitant to go that same route for fear of alienating Florida voters. It may also be that, with five days still left to campaign in Florida, the candidates are simply willing to let the contest develop a bit more organically on the retail stump, rather than force the issue, through a potentially jarring set of nationally-televised debate exchanges.
Add/View CommentsIt's Showtime for The Mayor
Regardless of the motivations for this underlying group dynamic, it made for a fairly sedate viewing experience. John McCain continued his attempt at détente
with the establishment conservatives who have attacked
him mercilessly in recent weeks, and who seem to be slowly coalescing around Mitt Romney as the favored alternative. Romney, in turn, helped his own cause with a strong performance on the new dominant
campaign issue, the economy. Either for strategic reasons, or perhaps through inertia, the incredibly high stakes
did not motivate Rudy Giuliani beyond his typically solid
debate performance. At a minimum, it was clear last night that he is no longer the central focus
of these forums, in the way that he once was. We will know in about 10 days, whether Giuliani’s January 29th
scheduling gamble was the smart bet.
It is no secret that political observers and the media have largely given Rudy Giuliani a pass for his unwillingness to compete in virtually any of the primaries and caucuses preceding the Florida Primary, on January 29th
. This is partially due to the lead Giuliani held in national polls for most of 2007, but also to the fact that no one really knows for sure what the impact
of our remarkably frontloaded schedule will be on the nominee selection process. The Giuliani campaign has often claimed
that a win in Florida, and a strong showing in many of the states holding contests on February 5th
, are all that it needs to launch the Mayor on his way to the nomination. While this strategy has received plenty
, no one (including myself) has been willing to say, in advance of Florida, that Giuliani is done for sure.
Add/View CommentsParing (Pairing) Down Your Republican Options
So, if you need a reason to watch tonight’s Republican presidential debate (MSNBC, 9 p.m.), proximity to Giuliani’s day of reckoning should be sufficient motivation. With the Mayor trailing
both John McCain and Mitt Romney in the state, the stage is set for an event that may rival
Monday’s Democratic debate
in South Carolina.
In the past two weeks, I have put up a couple
assessing key Republican pairings in the three significant post-New Hampshire contests leading up to the large slate of primaries and caucuses on February 5th
. With Mitt Romney besting John McCain in Michigan, and McCain subsequently topping Mike Huckabee in South Carolina, only the Florida Primary on January 29th
remains of these initial pairings. In Florida, the possibility of a crucial match-up between Rudy Giuliani, who has largely staked
his candidacy on winning there, and Mike Huckabee, who, with a strong finish in South Carolina, could be positioned to capitalize on his appeal to social conservatives, has been of particular interest to me.
Add/View CommentsWhere Have You Gone, Joe Biden?
But that scenario is now a bit more complicated than it once was. Giuliani and Huckabee are indeed locked in a struggle, but if you believe recent polling
, theirs is a battle for third place, behind McCain and Romney. Having not received any real boost from his close loss to McCain in South Carolina, Huckabee is now scaling back
his campaign operation in Florida. In the meantime, Giuliani continues to pay a hefty political price for his absence from virtually all of the earlier Republican contests, both in terms of his standing
in national polls and his fundraising
ability. So, Giuliani and Huckabee continue to be a pairing of interest in Florida, if only to better understand who may be the next Republican to drop out of the race.
After about an hour of last night’s rancorous
Democratic presidential debate in South Carolina, I found myself wishing for one of those Joe Biden zingers
from earlier debates that always seemed to break the tension
in the air. Although the candidates were on better behavior when seated later in the debate, one can’t help feeling just a little bit grimy, after some of the nastier exchanges between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama.
While Obama’s performance
may help with his immediate task of winning the South Carolina Primary on Saturday, it nonetheless underscores the extent to which the dynamics of the Democratic contest have shifted since the early days after Iowa. All along, Obama’s movement candidacy has been driven by the notion that it can transcend traditional constituency-based politics. Early on, it was premised on the idea that momentum in Iowa and New Hampshire would generate a bandwagon effect, carrying Obama quickly to the nomination. Even with strong showings in New Hampshire and Nevada, however, that scenario is clearly no longer operative.
For me, last night’s pitched battle suggests that the contest has moved firmly back onto Hillary Clinton’s preferred political terrain. Like her husband, Clinton excels at close-in rhetorical combat, sharply wielding attacks against her rivals and appeals to her key constituencies. As much as Obama may yearn for the time a few weeks ago, when he seemed to float briefly above the political fray, the race now looks to be a traditional Democratic brawl over who can best mobilize their core constituencies, based on appeals to race, gender, ethnicity, and economic status. Perhaps not what Obama had in mind after Iowa, but, after last night’s debate, there appears to be no turning back.Add/View CommentsAl Gore Redux
Since Hillary Clinton’s surprise win in the New Hampshire Primary last week, much has been made about Clinton finally discovering her voice
as a candidate. But a piece
in yesterday’s New York Times
reminds us that this process of redefinition has actually been underway for quite some time. As the article notes, Clinton has debuted several public personas over the past year, and a quick web search underscores this thesis with similar stories from January
of 2007. The Times
article goes on to suggest that, even with the winning chord struck by Clinton in New Hampshire, the personality tweaking is not yet complete:
“…as her advisers said after New Hampshire, Mrs. Clinton cannot cry her way to the Democratic nomination. So she and her team have been searching for the right personality to help her connect emotionally with voters.”
As I reflect on Clinton’s ongoing struggle to recast her public persona, I am increasingly reminded of Al Gore’s similar experience with personality issues, during his run for the presidency in 2000. I reread a selection of press coverage from that 2000 presidential campaign season, and was struck anew by the way Gore was pilloried
in the media for being a “stiff” and “wooden” candidate. In the wake of his Nobel Prize
and the critical success of An Inconvenient Truth
, it seems we have almost forgotten Gore’s public humiliation
over disclosure that he was advised to transform his candidacy by wearing earth-toned suits and being more alpha male than beta. No one would deny that Gore now sports a very different public persona
than he did back then.
It would be nice to think that Clinton has finally settled on her authentic self, but my guess is that we have not seen the last of these periodic adjustments to her political persona. While Democratic primary and caucus goers seem to be generally accepting of this very public quest for personal authenticity as a candidate, Al Gore would probably advise Hillary Clinton that potential Republican opponents will not be quite as understanding.Add/View CommentsCount Me In
Add/View CommentsNow Do-Si-Do Your Republican Partner
When I posted
an item on Tuesday about requests for hand recounts of both the Democratic and Republican results from last week’s New Hampshire Primary, we were still waiting to see whether the two candidates involved would be able to produce the requisite funds by the State’s 3 p.m. deadline. While Democrat Dennis Kucinich came in with sufficient funds to undertake a partial recount
focused on two counties, Republican Albert Howard did not. Howard did, however, produce
a check the following afternoon to cover the cost of a complete Republican recount, and Secretary of State Bill Gardner appears willing to proceed. So, in several weeks, we may learn that there were problems with one or both of the electronic vote tallies, or that this was simply much ado about nothing.
Last week, I wrote
about key Republican candidate pairings that I would be watching closely, during the upcoming pre-February 5th
primaries. For two of those pairings, Mitt Romney and John McCain in Michigan, and Mick Huckabee and Fred Thompson in South Carolina, the short-term strategic picture has become a bit clearer, even as the party’s search for its likely nominee has become measurably more complicated.
With a decisive win in Michigan now under his belt, Mitt Romney lives to campaign another day in the Southeast. For me, the tenor of his performance in Michigan only underscores how much better served Romney would have been by running nationally as a pro-business Republican with great management skills, rather than as a social conservative with a strongly ideological worldview. At least Romney can claim to have done better
in Michigan than he did in Iowa. Perhaps that will give him renewed hope for South Carolina and Florida.
John McCain now moves on to South Carolina, as well, where the usual suspects
have already sharpened their knives in anticipation. His ability to deal with these personal attacks will, in part, determine the likelihood of success for his strategy of capturing the state’s veteran/national security vote. As was true in 2000, McCain still needs to demonstrate that he can pull in significant numbers of Republican votes in a state other than New Hampshire.
As for Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson, lest you need any additional evidence that my initial pairing of the two in South Carolina was appropriate, take a look at the statement
released by the Thompson campaign immediately after the Michigan results were announced last night:
“Mike Huckabee’s campaign to be John McCain’s Vice President has hit a snag. He has gone from the mid-thirties in Iowa to 11% in New Hampshire and now about 15% in Michigan. On higher taxes and looser immigration, Huckabee has been done his best these past few weeks to mimic McCain. But this is nothing new. In fact, while John McCain was leading the Senate charge to grant amnesty for illegal immigrants, Mike Huckabee was one of the loudest cheerleaders. And at the same time McCain was voting against the Bush tax cuts, Huckabee was in Arkansas increasing taxes some 21 times.”
So, Huckabee and Thompson continue their pitched battle for the support of social conservatives in South Carolina. Huckabee’s underperformance with Evangelicals in Michigan, where one would have expected his combination of economic populism and religious conservatism to pay dividends, was no doubt a disappointment for his campaign. But it is Romney’s improved showing with this group in Michigan that may truly complicate the ability of any single candidate to win the lion’s share of conservative support in either South Carolina or Florida.Add/View CommentsDown for the Count
Add/View CommentsThe Contextual Candidate
Out-of-state readers may not be aware that two presidential candidates have requested official recounts of both the Democratic and Republican results from last week’s New Hampshire Primary. Today’s Concord Monitor
takes a fascinating look
at the substantial cost and effort that would go into recounting all 525,000 ballots by hand. As the article suggests, the requests by Democrat Dennis Kucinich and Republican Albert Howard
feed into the larger ongoing debate
over the dependability of electronic voting machines and ballot counters. Because neither candidate finished within three percentage points of their respective primary winners, they will have to foot the hefty price tag on their own. Kucinich and Howard have until 3 p.m. today to come up with the cash.
I watched Hillary Clinton’s appearance
on Meet the Press
yesterday, and was struck by the number of times she used the word context
in response to Tim Russert’s predictable fusillade of questions. Russert dutifully walked Clinton through her remarks
on Martin Luther King, Jr. and Lyndon Johnson, her 2002 vote
on the Iraq War Resolution, and Bill Clinton’s fairytale
take on Barack Obama. Whether claiming that her comments were taken out of context
, or that her actions needed to be put into context
, Clinton seemed determined to recast virtually everything that Russert threw at her in a more positive light.
It is true that revisiting the conditions surrounding a particular political moment can sometimes shed new light on past behavior. But an excessive reliance on this approach can also blur the line between clarification and spin. Indeed, after several iterations, Clinton’s calls for context began to feel more like a strategy, and less like a legitimate request for fairness and greater understanding.Add/View CommentsWomen of Interest
Add/View CommentsThis Dance is for Republican Couples Only
Given all of the discussion about the crucial role that women voters played in Hillary Clinton’s New Hampshire victory, I was not surprised to see that Barack Obama is running a new campaign ad in Nevada that focuses exclusively on them. The ad intersperses now familiar footage of Obama’s Jefferson Jackson Dinner speech in Iowa with cutaway shots of several women watching attentively from the audience. What I find so interesting is that the ad makes no explicit pitch to women voters, yet the message is obvious. You can watch the ad here
, and decide for yourself.
The New Hampshire Primary’s first-in-the-nation status provides us with the luxury of assessing all of the presidential candidates on a single playing field. On the Republican side, with the notable exception of Fred Thompson, we were able to get a close look at the breadth and depth of the party's competition. But such will not be the case on February 5th, when two dozen states hold their contests, in what will be the closest thing to a national primary ever experienced by our presidential selection process.
Given that reality, I am not surprised to see the Republican candidates now being selective about how and where they compete leading up to that day of reckoning; each one is looking for a leg up in one or more of the preceding three contests – Michigan, South Carolina, and Florida – in order to demonstrate viability going into the big day on February 5th. With that in mind, I will be following several key pairings closely in the next few weeks.
In Michigan, I will be watching the contest between Mitt Romney and John McCain. Having just pulled his advertising in South Carolina and Florida, Romney is setting up Michigan to be his last stand. Having already lost in New Hampshire, where he enjoyed a home court advantage of sorts, he now looks to capitalize on his family’s deep political ties to Michigan. Although McCain won here in 2000, he will need to once again demonstrate that he has the energy and resources to build upon his success in New Hampshire. A victory for McCain would help to counterbalance another potentially difficult run in South Carolina.
In South Carolina, I will have my eye on the competition between Mike Huckabee and Fred Thompson. Huckabee will attempt to parlay his success in Iowa into strong support among social conservatives in the state. It wasn’t all that long ago, however, that Thompson was being sized up as a potential standard-bearer by this same group of voters. While they appear to have coalesced around Huckabee in Iowa, this has not stopped Thompson from suggesting that he may receive a better reception from them in South Carolina. Like Romney in Michigan, a victory here is essential for Thompson to continue.
In Florida, I will be eager to see what a fully engaged Rudy Giuliani can do against Mike Huckabee. For weeks now, Giuliani has set up Florida as the place where his candidacy will finally take off. The conventional wisdom is that, since Florida is chock full of retirees from the Northeast, they will rally behind the former New York City mayor. I have talked to several folks from the state, however, and they suggest that social conservatives in Florida’s panhandle and elsewhere may actually provide fertile ground for the Huckabee campaign.
So, we will have three crucial contests in short order, each with critical implications for one or more of the Republican candidates. While it is certainly most convenient to watch them all compete in a single state (my own), it will nonetheless be fascinating to see how each candidate sets expectations for his campaign, based upon where he is most competitive prior to that jackpot day in early February.Add/View CommentsYou Can Say That Again
Add/View CommentsAll Politics is National?
Well, the armies of campaign staffers have dispersed, and the last satellite truck has headed out on the interstate. All that is left are memories and a whole lot of muddy campaign signs. If you are looking for analysis of last night’s primary results, my appearance this morning on New Hampshire Public Radio’s The Exchange
will give you a good sense of my initial reaction to the Clinton and McCain victories. You can listen to the show at your leisure here
. I will be back up tomorrow with new content for you.
In the past 48 hours, I have heard both Rudy Giuliani and Hillary Clinton attempt to lower expectations for New Hampshire by noting that their strategy has always been to run a national campaign. For Giuliani, whose campaign presence in New Hampshire has always been uneven
, this statement is consistent with his prior behavior. Since mid-November
, he has largely looked past New Hampshire to Florida on January 29th
and to the 24 state primaries and caucuses on February 5th
. But for Clinton, who just a few days ago stated
that New Hampshire represented a fresh start for her campaign, the statement underscores a sudden realization that her first opportunity to gain any significant traction may well be in some of the states holding contests on February 5th
If either Giuliani or Clinton is able to capture their party’s nomination without winning any of the early contests, then we will know for sure that the frontloaded schedule has fundamentally altered the dynamics of the presidential selection process, moving us sharply toward a more nationalized style of politicking. Some would argue that we have already moved significantly in that direction, just through the tremendous impact of digital technology and the internet on how campaigns run, and on how voters consume political information. A fragmented field of Republican winners may provide Giuliani with the opportunity he seeks. But if Hillary Clinton is able to win the Democratic nomination, after losing to Barack Obama in three or four early contests, then we will know for sure that, whatever New Hampshire’s future role in the presidential selection process, all politics is no longer local.Add/View CommentsWill He Ever Stop Talking?
, for those of you who just can’t get enough, here are a few places where you can hear some extended analysis from me, during the next 48 hours:
Add/View CommentsWhere's Rudy?
Tuesday afternoon, I will be a guest on the Boston-based NPR program, Here & Now
. You can find information about the show’s affiliate stations and broadcast times here
Tuesday evening, I will be an in-studio political analyst for WMUR-TV
(ABC, Ch. 9), starting at 7 p.m. and continuing throughout the evening.
Wednesday morning at 9 a.m., I will be a guest on New Hampshire Public Radio’s The Exchange
, to do a post-primary wrap-up. You can listen to the show live here
, or catch it later here
Wednesday morning at 10 a.m., I will be a guest on Minnesota Public Radio’s Midmorning
. You can find more information about the show here
As I watched the Republican debate last night, I noticed that it felt downright odd to see Rudy Giuliani in the flesh and blood talking presidential politics at a New Hampshire political venue. Watching Giuliani turn in a solid debate performance, only underscored the extent to which he has been absent
from the Granite State, and from the recent Republican presidential campaign discourse, as well.
Giuliani’s campaign has blown hot and cold in New Hampshire over the past year. Some thought the state might be a good match for him, particularly on social issues. But the campaign never hit its stride here, and now Giuliani must hope that the early Republican contests see a plurality of winners, so that there is still no dominant frontrunner when the race moves on to Florida on January 29th, and to the 24 states holding primaries and caucuses on February 5th. If either Mike Huckabee or John McCain builds significant momentum through multiple victories before that time, Giuliani may find that New Hampshire was an opportunity unnecessarily missed.Add/View CommentsSatellite Tonight
I will be a guest on Beyond the Beltway with Bruce DuMont
this evening, from 7 to 9 p.m. Bruce is an old-school radio legend from Chicago, so I look forward to doing his show, when it hits New Hampshire every four years. You can listen to the show live on XM Radio channel 130 (POTUS ’08
), or you can find the closest terrestrial radio outlet here
Add/View CommentsTalkin' 'Bout My Generation
Also, if you missed yesterday’s Primary Primer
on New Hampshire Public Radio, you can listen to the show here
When I read Hillary Clinton’s comment
yesterday that she would, “…in the next five days, do as much as I can to talk about my record in creating opportunities for young people,” it made me cringe. Stung by the dramatic loss
of young voters (particularly young women) to Barack Obama in Iowa, Clinton has decided that she must work harder to lure young voters into her campaign’s fold.
I was teaching at Dartmouth College in 1996, when Bob Dole staged a remarkably awkward campaign event with MTV’s Choose or Lose Bus at Dartmouth’s Alpha Delta Fraternity (of Animal House fame). Dole was quite explicit that this was his attempt to connect with “the young people.” I am not suggesting that Hillary Clinton is a geriatric campaigner, and many of us remember Bill Clinton’s brilliant appearance on MTV, during the 1992 campaign (briefs, not boxers). But my experience with students has taught me that the minute you treat them as a demographic group to programmatically managed, you lose them.
I was still at Dartmouth in 2000, when John McCain mesmerized students with his mantra urging them to become part of something greater than their own self-interest. As a result, young voters were an integral part of McCain’s victory here. Like McCain in 2000, Obama seems to understand the need to appeal to young voters’ sense of civic empowerment, rather than to their individual self-interest. It certainly feels like Obama’s campaign has caught some of the McCain mojo this time around.
Clinton still has an opportunity to make her best case to young voters. But if she tries to wonk the vote with them, by detailing how all of her various policy proposals are in their own self-interest, she will make little headway in reversing the tide that carried Obama to victory in Iowa.Add/View CommentsBounce Baby Bounce
recently that conditions in the Democratic contest were such that a strong showing in Iowa might allow either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama to run the table through New Hampshire and South Carolina. Well, we will now get to see if that is indeed the case for Barack Obama.
New Hampshire’s undeclared voters, motivated by concerns over the Iraq War and spiraling healthcare costs, have long expressed an interest in participating in the Democratic primary this year. Obama’s victory last night in Iowa, coming with a healthy dose
of independents, may give them just the push they need to jump in with both feet.
It is also true that a resurgent John McCain will draw from this pool of undeclared voters, but he is perhaps even more likely now to garner support from Republicans who no longer see Mitt Romney as the most viable alternative to Mike Huckabee. In any event, we will soon see whether New Hampshire’s fabled undeclared voters can bounce both Obama and McCain across their respective finish lines.Add/View CommentsSteve Forbes? Really?
I find myself in the somewhat unusual position of wanting to defend Mitt Romney, in the wake of his loss last night in Iowa. I was bit surprised by the relish with which other candidates, political professionals, and the media all piled on to condemn Romney as the rich guy who tried to buy the election. I knew for sure that the political silly season was in full swing, when television commentators started comparing him to Steve Forbes and Phil Gramm.
Political professionals and the media judge the viability of political campaigns in large part by their ability to raise money and build organizations on the ground in the early states. By both of these measures, Romney has been a legitimate contender throughout this election cycle. The fact that he had been the frontrunner in both Iowa and New Hampshire for most of the past year is no small accomplishment, either.
Add/View CommentsGonna Get Some Lozenges
I have been tough
on Romney on a number of occasions over the past year, and he may eventually regret his decision to go negative over the past few weeks. But losing to Mike Huckabee, a former Baptist minister, in a Republican contest where some entrance polls
identified upwards of 60% of GOP caucus-goers as Evangelical Christians, does not mean that Romney’s political organization in Iowa was fundamentally flawed. For whatever challenges the Romney campaign now faces in New Hampshire and beyond, comparing him to Steve Forbes, an economic curiosity, and Phil Gramm, one of the worst campaigners in recent memory, misses the mark.
In a bit of a departure from the past few months, I will be spending much of the next five days talking, rather than writing, about presidential politics and the New Hampshire Primary. You will have ample opportunity to hear/watch/read my analysis on a daily basis. I will do my best to keep you apprised of my media whereabouts, and will continue to post to the website. But you just never can tell when my smiling face might pop up on your television screen, or my dulcet tones waft out of your car stereo.
Add/View CommentsYour "Primary" Sanity
I will be kicking things off with a special Saturday broadcast at New Hampshire Public Radio. I will be joining host Jon Greenberg at 4 p.m. for a live primary preview. You can listen over the web here
If you missed my Sunday Portsmouth Herald
piece on the shortened five-day interval between the Iowa Caucus and New Hampshire Primary, you can read it here
. I have also posted a copy
in the Essays section of this website.