Five Days in January

I have a hint of a suspicion, the merest bat’s squeak of an intimation, that Campaign 2008 finally started this week. That everything we’ve all said for the last twelve months, all that prating and polling and pontificating, is going to be eclipsed in the next 60 or 70 days and quite possibly turned completely on its head.

Why do I say this?  I detect a notable quickening in the campaign in the last week, a discernible shift in the tempo. Democrats have started attacking each other with urgency and gusto.  The polls are starting to suggest that the snow may have just begun to melt on the high slopes of the Hillary Clinton campaign.  Who knows what will be left standing when the avalanche is over?  I sense too that Americans, long largely oblivious to the so-called drama of the 08 campaign, are now awake to it.  We’re in that exciting and unpredictable phase of the campaign where politicians appear on Saturday Night Live.

But the main reason I think we’ve started is that we know from long experience that, however much the media may try to force the pace, however much we think we know the future further and further hence, this is when campaigns really begin – when the clocks go back and the night air in Iowa and New Hampshire chills the bones.

Now we have a real campaign for real votes in real states.

And the outcome of that election is, for all the certainty among punters, absolutely unpredictable.  A few hundred thousand voters in Iowa, a few more than that in New Hampshire, will, as they have for 40 years, determine who faces each other in a year’s time.

The stakes in those early races are, if anything, higher than ever. The dynamic among the Democrats is such that, quite simply, if Hillary wins Iowa, it’s over. If she loses Iowa and New Hampshire, she’s over.  A decade of campaigning hinges on Five Days in January.

And I haven’t even mentioned the Republicans yet. That race is even less predictable. The latest polls also suggest a shift too, and indicate that Rudy Giuliani, the frontrunner, is losing some of his momentum.  The latest polls, averaged by RealClearPolitics,  suggest we may still have a real five-way contest.

Hold tight. The next two months will change your world.

Comments

[Rod Polisher]

$4.2 million dollars raised on one day (5th November), an Internet and Republican record - ought to tell you who is a top tier Republican candidate - DR RON PAUL !

What is even more staggering is that the money came from average Americans $100 dollars at a time, not the large corporate donations of other candidates.

The main stream media is doing their best to ignore Ron Paul but his juggernaut is gathering steam whilst other candidate's campaigns are grinding to a halt.

BTW, I'm not American or even eligible to vote or donate. But if I could, there would be only 1 candidate that would get my cash - DR RON PAUL - Hope for America (and the rest of the world too!)...

[The Director]

Hilary Clinton is the worst candidate for the Democrats. Under their previous Administration they misappropriated Billions of Dollars. Gave money to corrupt entities like Nawar Sharif and Bhutto whom lined their own pockets.
Hilary reads of a pretext statement by Bill so she doesn't screw up what she has to say on a foreign policy.
She is not able to command Coalitions let alone look after a defence portfolio. She is the worst choice America can make.
There are better candidates than this woman and along with her husband whom have made the middle east a mess it is today. They allowed proliferation to continue and be financed through the aid donations and these are the people that the Democrats are putting forward?? It is time the American people realise the true legacy to which they left behind.
They would be like Bhutto talking and shaking hands with the Mullahs and the Taliban and encouraging them to spread their radical nonsense throughout the region.
Thus can I trust Bill Clinton or Hilary Clinton? No way they screwed up their term in office whilst lining their own pockets.
They are the worst candidates in this 2008 campaign.
Under their watch we had social and economic degeneration and in foreign policy , well proliferation increased.
The American people cannot vote for this woman as she lacks leadership and the vision to take the country forward.
The current administration is still cleaning up the mess to which was left behind of their term in office.
To Americans I say this make your vote count and do not vote for candidates that are about to shake the hands of radicals and Mullahs as the Clinton would do as they support a corrupt PPP in Pakistan.

[Colin742]

can I trust Bill Clinton or Hilary Clinton? No way they screwed up their term in office whilst lining their own pockets
Posted by: The Director | 07 November 2007 at 01:24 PM

The Clintons left office broke. Inspite of about $100,000,000 spent by Republicans to pin some crime on them all they got was that Bill was in some consensual sexual relationship.

Since leaving office Bill has spent most of his time saving thousands of lives in poor nations by getting free or low cost drugs. He also raised billions for other charitable projects.

Clearly accumulating personal wealth is low on their priorities. You can't take it with you.

[Hotspur]

People are being mean to Hilarry because she is a women. Mr. Putin and Mr. Amadenajad will be kinder to her - don't you know.

[Dayahka]

Lord help us! Except for Ron Paul and several undeclared and maybe one or two yet unknown but possible candidates, we do not have a single worthwhile candidate for president currently running. A balding sex-fiend from NY? Blah! A female George Bush clone? Gag!

No one, no one is facing reality and talking about what needs to be done: (1) Eliminate "growth" as an economic principle, (2) close down the credit (card) industry, (3) stop all of George's wars, (4) eliminate financial-based wealth creation, (5) stop all borrowing by the government, (6) reform the so-called profit-based health-care industry, (7) outlaw pit bulls, (8) develop a Manhattan project for renewable energy, (9) reward savings and penalize debt, (10) re-institute the death penalty for all rape, kidnapping, murder, meth dealers, and organized political party members.

[Matt]

Ron Paul : The biggest loser. He may have lots of money raised, but it's not going to do him any good. He may as well be considered the Ralph Nader candidate for 2008, a non-contender. Americans would be better off not wasting their votes on a 3rd party candidate if they really want to 'take back control'.. it's because of Ralph Nader that Gore and Kerry lost because those who would normally have voted for the Democrats, wasted their votes on someone who had no chance, thus costing the Democrats the elections.

I think the same can and could happen with Ron Paul and Republicans.

[Chris Coles]

Hilary Clinton must realise that the best way forward is to deny her Democratic Party opponents any further chance to get away with attacking her in debate. Instead, she must make them tell everyone what their OWN policies are. Personally, I was flabbergasted to watch her own parties opponents attacking her in open debate.

The Clinton's are by the far the best team the United States has at the moment and anyone who believes otherwise needs their heads examined.

Go for it Hilary. You stood by Bill in his hour of need and now you must stand by your nation and fight for it too.

[Richard]

Hillary is evil and personally repulsive. That said, anti-war and pro-freedom voters should support her against Giuliani. Both will follow the same policies, but Hillary will bring down the voters' wrath on her party and embolden the cowards in the other party. "The Ghoul" will stab his own in the back. In the meantime, support Ron Paul....

[Mel Clark]

Hilary Clinton is the candidite the Republicans should hope will win. She will continue all wars and thereby line their pockets further, and with her as president they can point the finger at the Democrats for the failure of these wars to protect the USA or "spread democracy".
The USA is in deep trouble, and Hilary will continue to drive them further into it. She is yet another Zionist candidate. Democrats all over American should wake up and select a candidate who will truly bring change, otherwise USA will be in further decline. My picks would be Denis Kucinic, (who the mainstream media ignore) or John Edwards.

[L. A. Dietz]

Wholly unfounded claims, Matt, against the man Andrew Napolitano rightly described as 'the Thomas Jefferson of our day'.

[Good God, Not RonPaul again!]

It is so tiring seeing these internet idiots promoting Ron Paul when he has nothing to do with the subject. When will these posters realise they have no true power but only the self-deluted influence they themselves keep writing about. Turn off your computer, open a window and look at the REALITY of politics in the US today. You have no power to change it, only the illusion of power given to you by those that truly have it.

[Ronald Fiskum]

I cannot believe all the trash that is being said about the Presidental Candidates. Isn't it time to join forces, get together and solve some of the problems we are confronted with as a nation. It seems that all we do is fight, fight, fight. It would be refreshing to hear the candidates talk together on solving the problems. No one has all the answers, but together they could form a group of "Americans" who care about the USA. I would like to see them stand up together and take the best from each whether Dem or Rep and see how good things would be.
It is time to stand up for the US and get our floors swept clean before we try to sweep the world clean.

[Gregory Highlights]

You can write this down.
1. The Democratic nominee for the 2008 US Presidential Elections will be Hillary Clinton.
2. The Democratic Party are currently the ruling US party.
3. There is no trend which indicates that the Democratic Party will be displaced as the majority party by November 2008.

Therefore, Hillary Clinton is outright favourite to win the Presidency of the United States.
If you shop around you may even get 7/10 odds which means you can earn 70% in 12 months on your investment in this near certain event outcome.

[John Currell]

The rest of the world will be better off without a Republican in the White House. We need a USA which will cooperate, not dominate.

[jlk]

Good article:

But who are these fringies that think Ron Paul has a snowballs chance in hell of diverting policy let alone being elected? Hello! Nobody but a few Libertarians even know who he is let alone care. Lets not give our Euro friends any more wrongheaded ideas than they already have. (Several have told me with the authority of whatever that Hillary is unelectable because she is a woman) Yeah right ...she is unelectable because of the B.... factor. If that is considered tasteless by the usual PC feminist contingent I would also say that Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson are unelectable because of the Mormon and "empty suit" factor respectively
JLK

[L. A. Dietz]

Anonymously insulting others is not exactly cool. Since the subject is Campaign 2008 and Dr. Ron Paul is fortunately and by far the most popular candidate (www.whowouldtheworldelect.com) it defies reason to propose 'he has nothing to do with the subject'. It is thanks to the internet that many a young person can google Executive Order 11110, Louis T. McFadden, Thomas Brackett Reed etc, download many a (full free pdf) book by Ludwig von Mises, Murray N. Rothbard, Hans-Hermann Hoppe, and watch Ron Paul on thousands of youtube clips. Only a fool or a fraud could be against the true freedom message.

[L. A. Dietz]

Sure, JLK, no need to tell us 'Euro friends' that the GOP base has shrunk since the neocon hijack, let alone about the USD 800 trn 'derivatives' time bomb. We 'only' know Ron Paul is about real issues, and with him in the White House a lot of parasites around the world will have to go out and get a productive job for a change.