|
To:
Our Readers
·
Romney campaign in precarious spot; Huckabee's nomination odds very
slim
·
Thompson making small strides
·
Hillary-Obama heating up, with
Edwards right behind
·
Democrats toothless on war, expert on fundraising
President 2008
Republican Overview:
With the Iowa caucuses in one week and the New Hampshire primary in 12
days, the GOP picture is getting fuzzier, rather than clearer. With
former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee under increased scrutiny, and
front-running former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney being closely
watched for any misstep, lesser candidates are seeing glimpses of hope.
1. In New Hampshire,
a late surge in the polls by Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) shows that
the original frontrunner's long-shot strategy is paying off. McCain, as
he did in 2000, has written off Iowa, and he is hoping a poor finish in
the caucuses won't hurt him in New Hampshire five days later --
especially if Huckabee, and not Romney, wins the caucuses. A win in New
Hampshire could aid McCain in third-in-the-nation Michigan on Jan. 15.
2. If Romney
finishes behind Huckabee in Iowa and behind McCain in New Hampshire,
he's seriously wounded and probably finished (with a big win in Michigan
a week later his only hope to hang on). He still has the most money and
the strongest campaign team, but those two early losses would devastate
his strategy of winning big early to get ahead of Giuliani, who still
leads (though barely) in national polls.
3. Rep. Tom
Tancredo's (Colo.) decision to drop out of the race at the last
minute equally helps former Sen. Fred Thompson (Tenn.) and
Romney, with some of his support likely going to Representatives Ron
Paul (Tex.) and Duncan Hunter (Calif.). Romney garnered
Tancredo's endorsement, which has some value, but immigration voters
will be most attracted to Thompson. That said, Tancredo's supporters
were a small bunch to begin with.
4. Thompson is
counting on a late surge in Iowa. He's shown some superficial signs of
success, garnering the backing of Iowa's two grassroots conservative
heroes: an endorsement from immigration hawk Rep. Steve King (R)
and the support of Tancredo's former Iowa chairman, Bill Salier,
who challenged liberal Rep. Greg Ganske (R) in the U.S. Senate
primary in 2002. However, it's not yet clear whether Thompson is
connecting with Iowa voters on the ground.
-
The
campaign of former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani is looking
imperiled. His New Hampshire poll numbers, like his national poll
numbers, have steadily fallen since mid-November. He can't count on a
strong showing in Iowa or South Carolina, and so all his hopes will
rest on big wins in Florida (January 29) and on February 5
Mega-Tuesday after a month of losses. His best hope is if Iowa, New
Hampshire, South Carolina, and Michigan go four different ways, which
is very possible.
6. If Huckabee does
not win Iowa, his run is probably over, especially if he has to compete
with Thompson in Southern states. Even if Huckabee wins Iowa, his
chances at winning the nomination are slim. His coffers are too empty,
his conservative credentials too flimsy, and his campaign infrastructure
too sparse.
7. For Ron Paul, a
third-place finish in Iowa is not out of the question.
Democrat Overview:
In the Democratic field, this much is clear: It's at most a three-way
race, with Senators Hillary Clinton (N.Y.) and Barack Obama
(Ill.) neck and neck while former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) trails
just behind them.
1. If Clinton wins
Iowa and New Hampshire, the race is over. She has the most money and the
highest name recognition, and her previous air of inevitability will
return at that point, much as it did for Sen. John Kerry (Mass.)
after his comeback Iowa win in 2004. If she loses both to Obama, it
becomes a two-way race with even odds.
2. Edwards, however,
has a chance of winning Iowa. That would shake up the race considerably,
and could even play to Clinton's advantage by weakening Obama.
3. Obama has nearly
as much money as Clinton and a strong campaign team. Two early wins
would give him legitimacy (which, as a young, inexperienced politician,
he needs badly). Even one early win would almost guarantee he would be
the Democratic favorite for President in 2016.
Congress
Session Recap:
Democrats faltered in the home stretch of the first session of the 110th
Congress, capping off a generally (but not entirely) disappointing
opening act as the majority.
1. Most aggravating
to their base, Democrats utterly failed to force policy change in Iraq.
Dozens of war-related resolutions, amendments, and bills have died in
the Senate or been stripped of all teeth to apply real pressure to the
Bush Administration on foreign policy.
2. While
disappointing to the party's liberal base and the anti-war vote that
swung Congress to the Democrats, Congress's impotence on war was to be
expected. Almost without exception, the other branches stay out of the
executive branch's way in foreign policy. This was not so much a case of
Democrats' underperforming as their overpromising.
3. Democrats easily
passed a minimum-wage hike, and a large package of subsidies and
mandates favoring renewable energy. These were probably their biggest
victories – the former to burnish their image as the workingman's party,
and the latter to please environmentalist special interest groups and
“green” big businesses.
4. Despite a mixed
record of accomplishments, Democrats have certainly established a new
tone on Capitol Hill. Their Pay-as-You-Go (PAYGo) rules have instituted
the idea that tax cuts must be offset by tax hikes -- heightening the
stakes of their class-warfare rhetoric.
5. The Democrats'
strongest suit was in using their legislative power to pressure
lobbyists and donors. The most striking example has been the issue of
taxes on the “carried interest” in hedge funds and private equity funds
earned by fund managers. Democrats have been debating and discussing
this issue all year, while never moving close to changing the law.
6. As we wrote in
September, the intention of the debate over hedge fund taxation -- and
the effect -- was to bring these hedge funds to the table with the new
majority. The industry had spent little on campaign contributions and
lobbying before this year, but that has all changed. In June alone, the
same month Democrats introduced three bills to change the taxation of
these funds, Sen. Chuck Schumer (D-N.Y.), chairman of the
Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee (DSCC), raised $1 million from
the industry.
7. Besides Schumer,
the other expert at using the majority as a fundraising tool is House
Ways & Means Chairman Charles Rangel (D-N.Y.). Rangel has already
raised far more money this cycle than any previous Ways & Means Chairman
in history, with $2.7 million by September 30 -- almost as much in less
than half of a cycle as former Chairman Bill Thomas (R-Calif.)
raised in his last two reelections combined.
8. Also, with his
Senate counterpart, Sen. Max Baucus (D-Mont.), Rangel launched
the Baucus-Rangel Leadership PAC, raising funds from financial and real
estate firms deeply interested in tax law changes.
9. Within the
Republican Party, there was a year-long clash over spending and
earmarking -- particularly in the Senate -- between conservative
back-benchers and the old guard, led by the appropriators and the party
leadership. At the year-end leadership struggles in the Senate, and in
the conservatives' push for a continuing resolution instead of an
omnibus, the appropriators gained late victories. Despite the Democrats'
demonstrated appetite for spending, congressional Republicans will have
trouble credibly running on fiscal restraint.
10. Many of the
Democratic clashes with the White House or the Senate minority were
standard political struggles, typified by the battle over expanding the
State's Children's Health Insurance Program (SCHIP). Democrats could
have passed into law a bill almost as expansive as the one vetoed by
President Bush, but instead they made political hay out of it. Forcing
politically tough vetoes is an old game on Capitol Hill, and the
Democrats played it well.
11. Next year, with the
Democratic nominee probably sitting in the Senate, expect even more
clashes with the White House, although the Democrats may want to avoid
the war issue altogether. |