After New Hampshire

[prog]

I could not have asked for a better opening to primary season. So relieved that Iowa and NH had such different results, keeping everything wide open.

I actually don't care much who wins in either side - I like all of these Democrats, and think they can beat any of those Republicans - but I love watching them develop as candidates. Nearly as much, I love watching the horse-race callers get proven wrong, and wrong again, about both parties. (Not that I actually waste time watching the horse race; I just read reactions to it in blog comments.)

A while ago I decided that the only final configuration I wouldn't like is Edwards versus Romney, if only because it'd look dead-boring. Objectively handsome white guy A versus objectively handsome white guy B, and I'm afraid that people would get confused and vote for the one with those super-presidential graying temples. I don't think that's crass of me; surface counts for a lot, in this. But we seem to be safe from that, for now.

Comments

[rserocki.livejournal.com]

Other people are glad like you are:

NEW YORK (CNN) -- Many of our political savants and pundits took one in the teeth last night. I couldn't be happier about last night's surprising results, and not because I favor one candidate or another. I'm just glad the so-called experts in the national media were wrong about their premature assumptions that the Democratic and Republican nominations for president were a done deal.

[radtea.livejournal.com]

I'm calling Clinton/Obama vs Huckabee/McCain as the final configuration. This has far more to do with narrative causality than polling.

On the Democratic side, Clinton has the money, the machine and the experience. Obama will contribute his aura of youth and "change", and will be seen as a "president-in-training", giving the Dems an illusion of depth and legacy potential. Also, he's assassination insurance for Hillary: nutjobs who'd want to kill her would be even more opposed to a black man as President. Edwards is too dull, and carries with him the whiff of past losses.

Huckabee/McCain is a harder call, but Huckabee is affable, experienced and has the backing of the faithtards religious right. McCain appeals to the more secular side of things, and they both agree on certain fundamental values, like "torture is bad", which the other Republican candidates apparently have trouble understanding.

Giuliani is a fear-mongering fascist, which is going out of style, and Romney is so unmemorable that I had to check a website to recall his name, as well as having the "weirder by God than me" factor.

And the most compelling logic of all: I'd love to see those teams campaign against each other, particularly because some issues would be right off the table, and whoever won the election, the next occupant of the Oval Office would never wake up wondering, "Who would Jesus torture?"

[ruthling.livejournal.com]

similar to my thoughts. here's to an interesting campaign season!