Wrong First Impressions of Election 08

Over the past summer and autumn, I have been stalling for time in my coverage of the 2008 presidential election.

The reason I have done this, although understandably my readers would have liked some clarity and predictions about the outcomes in the nominating races, was that I felt such clarity could not be provided. The campaign began prematurely, money has been spent, innumerable polls have been taken, and much written in analysis, but as I understand this process after observing it professionally for 35 years, it is not really possible to say much of real use until the voters begin to take active part in it.

This long interim, however, has only further encouraged many who dwell in the Beltway that a presidential election is really determined by op-eds, editorial analyses, endorsements, polls, political consultants and the professional political class as a whole.

The good news is that we have now arrived at the point when those who are really in charge, the voters, intervene. The first actual voting will take place in about a month in the Iowa Caucuses and in other caucuses and primaries soon after that.

Covering the presidential campaign process as long as I have does not make one wise, but it does give you perspective, and enables you to look beyond the current conventional wisdom shouted out in headlines and breathless news stories.

Let us review the conventional wisdom which emerged in 2007.

Initially, it was said that 2008 was likely to replay or continue the political environment of 2006, when deep dissatisfaction with President Bush, the GOP-controlled Congress and the war in Iraq led to many Democratic pick-ups in both houses of Congress that year.

Secondly, it was said that it was the Democrats' turn, after two Republican terms (and the incumbent's unpopularity) to win the presidency in 2008.

Third, with the early scheduling of Nevada and South Carolina, and the creation of a mega-Super Tuesday on February 5 (when almost half of all the delegates would be chosen), it was said that the Iowa Caucuses would no longer matter much.

Fourth, the front-loading of primaries and caucuses was said to produce the party nominees by the morning of February 6.

Fifth, it was said that the premature campaigning, begun at least a year earlier than usual, would turn voters off.

Sixth, it was said, once the list of Democratic candidates was known, that Sen. Hillary Clinton, with her huge campaign financial war chest, her large political organization, her husband's advice and campaigning on her behalf, and her long-held reputation for toughness, made it likely that she would be her party's nominee, and eventually, the new president.

Seventh, it was said that the Republican Party would not nominate someone who is not a social conservative.

And eighth, it was predicted that the war in Iraq was hopelessly mired in negative news and could not be turned around in time for the 2008 election.

As a contrarian, I can report that almost none of the above conventional wisdom is holding up as we enter the actual voting phase of the primary process.

The now Democratic-controlled Congress has clearly failed to take advantage of its 2006 triumph and, led by the inept Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi, has somehow managed to become significantly more unpopular than even the president. The war in Iraq has taken a clear turn for the better. A downturn in the real estate market and widespread mortgage foreclosures has created unexpected economic unease which is usually bad news for the incumbent White House party, but with the opposition party in charge of an unpopular Congress, it is not clear yet who the voters will punish most.

In the nomination process, it turns out that, for both major parties, Iowa does matter. Just as John Kerry rose suddenly in Iowa in 2004, there are indications that Sen. Barack Obama is closing strong this year in Iowa, and might even win big there. Likewise, former Gov. Mike Huckabee is closing strong on the GOP side, and could upset former Gov. Mitt Romney's strategy of winning Iowa, New Hampshire and South Carolina before former Mayor Rudy Giuliani can make a comeback in Florida and the northeast industrial states.

Although Mr. Huckabee is making a run for it, Mr. Giuliani and Mr. Romney remain the likely finalists. Many social conservatives, in spite of the admonitions from some of their leaders, seem, if we can believe the polls, willing to nominate an economic conservative who can win. Fred Thompson, dismissed by the pundits so far, remains in the wings.

Rather than being turned off by the protracted preliminaries, the voters mostly ignored them, and only now are turning their full attention to the presidential campaign. Mrs. Clinton may indeed eventually be nominated, and win the presidency, but her "inevitability" is now in question, and both nomination races might go beyond the February 5 mega-primary day.

The real "deciders" are now taking part, and the time for stalling is over.