Friday, January 04, 2008

Obama, Huckabee

Although Iowa historically hasn't been the best indicator of who the next president will be, these are the two winners last night. The big losers were Romney and Clinton. I say this because, they spent a lot of money and still didn't win.

Clinton finished third, which is probably unacceptable to her camp. Maybe she should have listened to her advisers and skipped Iowa and focused more on New Hampshire and beyond.

One thing of note for the GOP is, if they want to have any chance to win in November, Huckabee is not the man. But despite that general conventional wisdom in conservative circles, he managed to eke out the win and score some delegates.

Anyway, it's over now. At least for Iowans, they get their lives back now.


Greg said...

Call me inconsistent, but now that Huckabee is doing well, I'm pulling my prediction of good things for him. I think he ruined his campaign by criticizing Romney's religious beliefs. That crap ain't gonna fly in NH or most other places in this country.

On the other hand, I think Obama's victory is very significant b/c it was a bit unexpected. And it's bad news for Hillary b/c she did much worse than expected.

Overall, the NH primary is way more important.

Also, big "I told you so" to Giuliani. He was nowhere in Iowa. And he ignored NH as well. If he isn't even in the top 5 after the first 2 primaries, people may start forgetting he's even running.

Anonymous said...

I don't see any major upsets here. Clinton didn't expect to win in Iowa, and every liberal loves a Muslim-Christian-Jewish-Buddhist-Hindu-Animist candidate.

I think Hickup was expected to win in Iowa, but I agree with Greg that he has an up-hill battle elsewhere. Sadly, every thirty years or so, some nut like Jimmy Carter comes out of the woodwork and takes over the White House.

I must say that the longer this crap goes on, the better McCain looks as a presidential hopeful. I would vote for Romney if he's send me one of his miscellaneous millions (just one), but otherwise he's too "made up" for my taste. As for Rudy, I think he has too many skeltons in his closet, true even if most people weren't looking for a perfect man in the white house.

BTW, in his "victory speech" Obama said that when he's elected, he will not countenance any special interests in HIS White House. Damn. All these years, I thought it was OUR White House.

Semper Fi

A.C. McCloud said...

I've been watching Huck on the various interview videos this afternoon. He really is underrated as a politician. He just keeps churning out that populism no matter what the hosts try to ask him, and people eat it up. Dick Morris was right.

Obob said...

huck is a sprinter, but I don't think he has the legs. His one advantage is his weakness. Ed Rollins. I know have praised Rollins, but he doesn't have the niceness of Huck. Rollins is a nasty bugger who can also put together a campaign.
Romney and McCain either make a push or wait for Huck to give him a clean shot. Clean. And we have yet to see Rudy open up and Fred needs to get the message out better.