Presidential Status Report

John Baehr has a good summary of where the various races stand.

On the GOP side, I think there is simply too much fluidity in the race to really figure out what is going on. The pending entry of Fred Thompson has thrown a monkey wrench in the race. The general irritation that the GOP base has for John McCain has, I think, sealed his doom despite his public actions to stem the bleeding. His involvement with the amnesty bill pretty much ended it for him. While I like Giuliani, his appeal is his ability to win cross over votes in the general election, which means he is not nearly far enough to the right to really wrap up a win in the primaries. The question is whether or not the GOP primary voter is more interested in winning in 2008 or in sending a message to the party to get back to basics. If the former, Giuliani has a good shot, if the latter, he is toast.

But the Democratic side is shaping up to be a Clinton/Obama race. Here Baehr is right on:

The Clinton campaign is very much a machine, designed to mow down opponents. Obama's money haul and freshness as a candidate make him a serious threat for the nomination. Obama needs to pull an upset in Iowa to catch fire, I think. Since the state's Democratic caucus participants tend to be quite liberal in their politics, Obama has a shot at winning, especially given the odd way that caucus results are tallied (with some candidates eliminated and their voters getting to select a second choice)). The real damage to Clinton would be if Obama won Iowa and Edwards finished second. A third place defeat for Clinton would be hard to spin away, and the media, who are not by and large in love with her, would trumpet Iowa as a major blow to her candidacy. Obama would be all over the newsweeklies, talks shows and get millions in free positive publicity.


I think Edwards will fade in Iowa , as he has nationally (there in not much propping up his candidacy there other than time spent in Iowa at this point).


But an Obama win over Hillary in Iowa, even if she finishes second there, would be damaging for her projection of the "inevitability" of her eventual triumph.


The soft underbelly to the Clinton campaign is the fact that national polls show her with greater negatives than positives. She has, I think, after 15 years of national exposure, little ability to change these impressions . Obama has much higher favorable to unfavorable ratings. Democrats obsessed with winning the White House in 2008, may fear that her high negatives and woodenness as a candidate might result in her blowing what they believe is their near-certain victory next year. Add to that, a strong sense of anger and betrayal among the energized left wing base of the party over her support for the Iraq war, and the search for an alternative candidate, once the real voting starts, is a real risk to her chances. For the Democratic left, their hearts are with Dennis Kucinich, which gives you some idea of their center of gravity.

Obama may be peaking at just the right time, while Hillary has to sustain the "air of inevitability," a tough feat at best. The question that remains for me is does Obama mass appeal in fundraising terms translate to support at the grassroots and voting booth level.