After Iowa ...

How interesting do we find these results?

Large Turnout in Iowa Caucus Brings Victory to Obama, Huckabee
By Greg Flakus Des Moines, Iowa04 January 2008

Illinois Senator Barack Obama and former Arkansas Governor Mike Huckabee have won the Iowa caucuses held in that Midwestern state on Thursday. Obama, who won the most votes in the Democratic Party caucuses, is the first person of African descent to have won the first-in-the-nation political contest. Huckabee, who won the Republican contest, came from near obscurity to defeat former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney, who had outspent him on campaign ads in the state. VOA's Greg Flakus was on hand to witness the process and has this report from Des Moines.

So, Obama and Huckabee. How do we feel about this? A bit surprising, perhaps?

Obama, I don't think. We knew he was polling well against Hillary, and there were some negative which were appearing them, foremost IMO her perceived support for the war effort. Whether that was entirely fair or not, I don't know, and it doesn't seem the proper thing given supporting our troops was the right thing to do. But count on the libDem core to be turned off by that.

Now, Huckabee I do count a surprise. Consider he had to pass two people - Giuliani and Romney - to take a victory. Not a terribly easy thing. Why, do you suppose? A Midwesterner speaking to Midwesterners, perhaps? Be that as it may, it was nto entirely unexpected either. But one wonders what it will do to the race. Do Giuliani and Romney brush off the results, confident that when the effort most East (as it will now) that they'll reverse it? What do Thompson and McCain take away from this?

Bottom line question: Do these results appeal to you? Turn off? Energize for any direction, even a different one? I find myself rather blase about it, and am curious to see what others think.

Let's roll, people!

Getting It Started ...

Kick-Off: the 2008 Election Cycle ...

This was the topic that - after discussing re-starting with Comrade Dominguez - came up first. And why not? This year promises to be interesting in terms of whether conservatives have any chance at winning coming off of four years of Bush.

Certainly the Dems haven't done themselves any favors since the last midterms gave them control of the House and de facto control of the Senate; mostly, they've been ineffectual (often completely so) at trying to impose the agenda they thought they had a mandate for, and have instead seemed at many points to get stuck on attempting to carry out a plan of revenge on the Administration in its waning years. Does this give the Elephant any chance at swinging Congress back in the other direction?

However, that's not the biggest question. That, of course, is the Presidency. The question as I see it is, will the Dems' utter inability to do anything with Congress harm their chances for the Oval Office, or will 8 years of Bush spell doom for conservative candidates for the position?

From my morning Comcast feed: Candidates Urge Voter Turnout in Iowa

On the face of it, this was not surprising, as was the general turn-away from negative campaigning. Given the stigma attached to such campaigning, sooner or later it had to happen. Rather interesting that the article notes it's a Republican candidate that is the only one continuing such efforts (Romney - although it could be argued Huckabee did, as well).

But I draw attention to a particular item that sort of snuck in:

"There were signs that Democratic voters are more energized than Republicans.

"Democrat Joe Biden, who ranks in the low single digits in polls, attracted 500 people to a noontime event at a Des Moines brewery - a bigger crowd than any Republican candidate usually gets."

This, if true, is worrisome to me.

Turnout has, I think, always been an issue for Republicans; and if you take that as a given, it does not bode well for the vote itself if we do not see voters going to the polls for the candidates - or the candidate (once he is chosen). It would mean a return to the worst days of Clinton, where Willy had a rubber-stamp Congress; and I think all of us would agree that's something heartily to be eschewed.

Anyway, a few thoughts to open conversation.

Someone else's turn!

A Brand New Blog ... But An Old Idea

I said I would do this, and so I have.

After discussing with Comrade Dominguez, that is. Next step is to try and get more folks on board, all the old crew - Tovarisch Demetri, Derek, Mike, Dave, Paul, Paula ... and everyone else I can think of who'd be interested but wouldn't cause a melt-down every time we got into something.

Or, on second thought, maybe we'll open it up to such folks. Might be interesting. A question for the membership, tho.

Several quick-and-dirty rules:

1. If you have a new topic you want to discuss, just write it up, send it to me and I'll post it up. I'm not seeing any other limitations to that at this time. That includes if you want any labels or such for the topic.
2. I mean this blog for those of us who used to talk ... but it is a public blog - we may see other folks at random. As long as it's not disruptive, we should welcome them and leave it open.
3. Please feel free to advertise to anyone else you think would benefit from/positively contribute to the effort.

And let the discussion begin!