Posted 7:32 PM by steve

Count me unimpressed with all the chattering that the New Hampshire primary is a make or break event for candidates like Hillary Clinton and Mitt Romney...

On the Democratic side, for all the hoopla over his win in Iowa, Obama won one measly delegate more than Clinton did, 18 delegates for Obama to 17 for Clinton. Whoopee! And there are only 22 delegates at stake in New Hampshire, so even if Obama wins there as well, his lead over Clinton will probably be in the range of 3-4 delegates. Whoopee! But wait, Clinton has the lion's share of the so-called superdelegates, so she is actually assured of still leading in the delegate count no matter how things turn out in New Hampshire. The same holds true on the GOP side. Even with his win in Iowa, Huckabee still trails Romney in the delegate count, with McCain, reportedly poised to deliver a knockout blow to Romney, trails even Thompson in the delegate count.

There are an awful lot of states who still have yet to award their delegates after tonight.... if I'm not mistaken, 47 of them. On the GOP side, barely 59 out of 2,380 delegates have been awarded. On the Democratic side, 3,738 of the 4,049 delegates are still up for grabs. It is beyond silly (but not unexpected) that anyone would declare the race over with so many votes still to be counted.

While there may be some shifting loyalties among primary voters, as voters jump on the Obama (or Huckabee or McCain) bandwagon, I see no reason why Clinton (or Romney or Thompson) ought to be overly concerned at this point. Obama isn't going to have a free ride from the press throughout the campaign; the media, as it always does, will eventually turn their focus on uncovering and reporting on the new front-runner's negatives... and when it does, Clinton stands to be the beneficiary.

The media loves fads, except that it doesn't recognize them as such, instead pronouncing them lasting and society-changing events. It makes them feel important. They do so with TV shows that are supposed to revolutionize the way we watch TV, with gadgets that are supposed to change everything, with new artists who are supposed to be greater than Elvis and the Beatles combined, and they do so with political candidates who they paint as being such breaths of fresh air who will make everything in the world right again. The media did so with John Kennedy, who, history shows, was, at best, a mediocre President. They did so with Gary Hart, before he self-destructed. Ross Perot was supposed to usher in the millions of voters who were tired of the same old stuff from the Democrats and Republicans. All of these media-designated new waves turned out to be, well, not much ado at all.

The same holds true for Obama. For all of the hype about his being the savior, the breaker of barriers, his (limited) track record shows he just a die-hard liberal. A die-hard liberal who disguises his colors by not talking about his record, but a die-hard liberal nonetheless. He talks about changing things, but when he gets pressed - as he will be eventually - about where exactly his changes will take us, he and his acolytes are going to be disappointed that the country isn't going to be impressed when he says higher taxes, restrictive trade policies, appeasement of terrorists and the regimes that support them, a weakening of already weak immigration enforcement efforts, and more government involvement in our daily lives. As an attendee at a recent candidate debate asked a GOP candidate, 'What will you do to improve my life?', eventually that question is going to be aimed at Obama. He'll try to dodge the question by talking about getting past the partisanship, the deadlocks, the animosity... but some reporter or one of the debate moderators or a voter at one of the open microphone debates is going to push for a real answer... for while we, both Democrats and Republicans want change (for one, I want fewer Democrats screwing things up), there aren't that many people who will think his changes are going to improve their lives.... and, with that, as with the Wizard, the curtain of power and inevitability is going to come crashing down, revealing Obama as he really is: a seemingly nice guy with a lightweight resume who will find that America isn't interested in what he is selling.

So don't give up quite yet Hillary. The fawning press coverage for Obama will subside and you'll find America liking your positions on the issues more than Obama's. C'mon, anyone who forswears the use of nukes and threatens to invade Pakistan just doesn't have his act together... and the American public is gullible and prone to doing dumb things, but we're not stupid. You're the one among the Democratic side who has the grown up position on the fight against terrorists, the economy and so on... and when the public turns a more skeptical eye towards the substance (or lack thereof) of what Obama is saying, you're going to sound and look real good to people.

Of course, we won't know if your positions represent the way you really feel or are simply the positions you're taking to get elected, but by the time the press gets back to giving you the 3rd degree, you'll be the Democratic nominee for President.