President McCain or Obama

So Obama and McCain both win in Wisconsin. No shocks there, but it was a state Hillary should have had a shot of winning in. Nine successive defeats for her now, but she's not out. She just has a now almost impossible mountain to climb. To become the nominee she'll not just have to win both Ohio and Texas, but win them in a big way, keep motoring on from there, and most likely have enough super delegates in her pocket in the nominating convention in the summer, and succeed at getting Michigan and Florida delegates seated there and...get the picture? Half of those requirements would alienate people she needs from her anyway.

It's doable, but would now require a comeback far greater than New Hampshire or anything Bill has ever managed. I get the feeling Romney's withdrawal and endorsement of McCain did this to her, and even though I still believe she's the best candidate, that's a political narrative completely out of her control.

A Message From the Real President

Of course he makes some fundamental misunderstandings - as a stereotypical straight man (I mean look at Tipper) he probably can't really think outside of the sexual *ahem* box - marriage as the means of locking in fidelity, promiscuity is somehow fundamentally a 'problem' - but ultimately his point is entirely right and just. Loving your partner should be encouraged and celebrated, whoever they are. The statistics show worldwide, in countries which have embraced same sex marriage in its many models - full marriage as in Canada and Spain, through to Britain's civil partnerships - that it's something we're just as good at as straight people. In fact considering that marriage is in decline with them, we're doing it quite a bit better.

Speaking as an American citizen, who is also British, as a gay man who married his male partner in 2006, I feel proud to see the man who was voted for by the majority of Americans in 2000 to speak for them, speaking of my world, my ambitions and my love for my partner in this way. My marriage to Tom doesn't threaten anyone else's, and whilst we've made plenty of mistakes, even some disastrous ones, we remain driven by the entirely symbolic commitment. It's that symbolism which is important. I am someone whose worldview is entirely secular, yet I accept fully that all cultures and individuals have always been driven by belief in the metaphysical; it seems to be part of our nature. It may seem contradictory to some, but it's something I embrace. If only Obama and Clinton had the courage to talk in this way - this is at the heart of what real change is all about.

Democrats in South Carolina

Well I called it right and was also right in saying that the campaign tone would collapse. The Guardian is right in saying that it's important that the Democratic candidates be tested - whether Hillary can appeal to anyone other than her base and whether Obama actually has any big ideas to match up to the rhetoric. But it's also true that if they spend all their energies demolishing each other, it's entirely true that someone like McCain could creep through the middle.

I'm going to call South Carolina for Obama, which I hope is the case because these two can keep proving themselves rather than resorting to desperate measures merely to win. If Hillary wins though, this gets even nastier, the attacks on Bill Clinton will start to become even more frantic, and the nomination gets essentially sewn up. Just too soon maybe to have a just winner.

The Tears of Hillary

It remains an interesting question: did Hillary's emotional moment swing everything her way in New Hampshire? Germaine Greer thinks that even if it did, that's not a good thing.

I'm not sure. It sure got John Edwards all fired up and sexist, which itself has been revealing in a contest which is refreshingly opening up all sorts of deep rooted questions about race and gender in the US. Thatcher became Prime Minister nigh effortlessly nearly three decades ago, yet Hillary still gets heckled by people demanding she iron their shirts? As Bill Clinton said - give me a break! Does that mean though that she used a soft option to get what she wanted, or was it a rare demonstration of humanity in someone often accused of having none, who's trying to supplant a president who couldn't even spell the word? There don't seem to be any definitive answers to any of these questions in this contest, which itself I find interesting.

A lecturer of mine once described us as being in a post-modern age of claim and counter claim - there were no more unifying truths. I would be inclined to agree. That can yet come back to bite her or Obama on the ass.

One of Two

Ooh I called New Hampshire right.



And thankfully my last point seems to have gained resonance. If Obama's going to win, it can't be with this ridiculously easy ride he's been given. Hillary's emotional moment proved to her base, maybe for the first time, that she wants it more than anything. May the battle be joined, and finally produce a well tested and just winner, for the first time since, well, Bill left office really (let's ignore his infidelities, petty corruptions and media manipulations for the sake of argument for now, eh?).

Hillary's Last Stand?

The truth is Hillary could defeat Giuliani at his scare-mongriest, Huckabee at his most religious, could swat Romney like an insect and outsmart McCain.

Obama?

Are we again to have a Presidential debate where the smartest person in the room loses through lack of experience? Or does Obama really have something new, something special? You see I like the idea of a female Commander-in-Chief, of Bill Clinton back in the thick of it. She could hit the ground running, which hasn't been imperative before. It is now. For all Obama's lefty rhetoric, his threat to bomb Pakistan sounds pretty neo-Conservative to me. She voted for Iraq - they all did. It's time to move on - she and Obama both agree on that.

Neither of them has governed but she has been at the forefront of national politics for a generation & her intellect is second to none. Her judgment's also a quantum improvement on Bill's. So why vote Obama?

Unpredictable 2008

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.

Iowa

My guess? It'll be fun to find out the truth tomorrow, but my prediction for this round at least?

Clinton and Romney to win.

Oh you want me to make an initial guess for November? Clinton v Huckabee.