Ok so my prediction the other day was diametrically opposed to the reality. No Clinton/Romney, but Obama/Huckabee. I was way off - it looks as though the contests are realigning, and that the overall demands of the electorate are realigning. Maybe. So who to win New Hampshire?
Clinton/McCain
Romney won't leave the contest despite having been floored below the waterline, which will be music to Giuliani's ears for the end of the month. McCain though becomes stronger, the more the 'surge' in Iraq is being spun by the media as being remotely a positive thing.
Hillary did very well in the debate last night by many accounts, and may have blunted the edge of the 'agent of change' label which seems now firmly fastened to Obama. Defining 'experience' (which hasn't worked for her so far) as '35 years as a change maker' was a very good move. If it doesn't stick in New Hampshire though, the mountain she'll have to climb will be increasingly tall. I must say her Bush-esque comments about attacking foreign countries who 'harbour' terrorists (I can't imagine any doing so all that willingly anymore) was very appealing, although nor was Obama's repetition of an earlier claim he would attack 'terrorists' in Pakistan without anyone's prior approval. Does that really jibe with him being an 'agent of change'? Sounds pretty neo-Conservative to me.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
.gif)
No comments:
Post a Comment