Ask someone who works for either Barack Obama (Ill.) or John McCain (Ariz.) about the search for a vice presidential nominee and, to a person, the response you get goes something like this: “It’s way too early to even be thinking about specific names.”
Bring up potential VP’s with people outside the direct orbit of the campaigns, however, and you get a panoply of names, discussions of running mate strategy, and handicapping of strengths and weaknesses.
Welcome to the veepstakes — where those who know the most are saying the least and, unfortunately, vice versa.
The Fix, as always, navigates these tricky waters for the good of our readers. Conversations with a variety of operatives who are in a position to have a general sense of the veepstakes have produced the lists you will find below. When it comes to picking a vice presidential candidate, we acknowledge it is something of a moving target — so if your preferred guy (or gal) didn’t make the list never fear, they could show up next time.
Also, since McCain and Obama appear to have the nominations locked up, we are, for the first time, ranking the five most likely veep picks. The number one slot on the Line is the candidate with the best chance — right now — of being picked.
Agree or disagree? Have a favorite of your own? Or even a full list? The comments section awaits.
March 13th, 2008 by JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
The Republican party’s Presidential nominee to be, Senator John McCain, is now dropping hints that, yes, he would indeed seriously consider his former nomination rival former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney as his running mate. And there is an irony in this.
McCain is virtually assured of getting the Republican nomination, and can plot his strategy and raise funds while the Democratic front runners batter each other. There continue to be signs that some conservatives could sit on their hands in November, since McCain was one of conservatives’ least-favorite Senators.
Romney was a favorite of conservatives — but only towards the end of the primary season, when they realized he was the only one of any strength who had a chance of stopping the hated McCain. Bu,t when Romney first appeared, conservatives poked fun at his changing positions and moderate Republican past. He started being called a RINO, became a not-to-be-trusted convert to conservatism and — as actor-Senator Fred Thompson fizzled — ended up as the great conservative hope.
There were recently rumblings about Romney being willing to run for the Veep slot. And Romney did nothing to squelch them.
GOP presidential contender John McCain would not rule out Mitt Romney as a possible running mate yesterday, noting that the former Bay State governor ran an effective primary campaign and is a rising star in national politics.
“Millions of Republicans voted for him,” McCain said during a swing through New Hampshire. “He’s earned himself a place in the future of the Republican Party.”
McCain said he is just beginning his deliberations on a running mate and that it’s premature to say whether Romney is among the names he’s considering. During a national TV interview Tuesday, Romney said he would be “honored” to be selected by the Arizona senator.
And Romney? He is now talking nice about John McCain, basically saying past squabbles were only business.
“Politics is a rough and tumble sport, and you do what you need to do to win,” Romney said on the Fox News program Hannity and Colmes. “There really are no hard feelings.” Later, Romney added, “There are things I wish he would not have said, but he was successful, and I have to recognize that now is the time for us to come together and support his candidacy.” Romney said his fund-raising team — a group of successful business associates who out-raised many of the other Republican contenders — have been put to work on McCain’s behalf.
But it would make sense. It would be perhaps the first Republican ticket in many years containing two media savvy politicos who know how to talk to the TV camera but also come across well on the TV camera.
Downside: neither have sterling, lifetime conservative credentials. But how could conservatives complain about Romney…since he had been (for a while at least) touted as the great conservative hope? CBS News’ blog thinks Romney could be a tough sell.
Almost a year ago, the Crystal Ball took a first crack at listing the vice presidential possibilities in both parties (LINK). The list has held up surprisingly well. But the justifications for various candidacies have changed, and now that we know John McCain will make the choice, it’s time for reconsideration. (We’ll await the unofficial crowning of the Democratic nominee to play this game on the Democratic side, unless Democrats keep the game tied through the spring. Our discipline can only last so long.)
Let’s start by revising and extending our earlier remarks, and asking the most important question. Ideally, what does a presidential candidate need in a VP ticket-mate? Here are the most important elements, and a second-banana nominee ought to meet most of these criteria:
February 14th, 2008 by JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
NOTE: This is a special Guest Voice sent out by Political Scientist Larry Sabato, whose Crystal Ball is required — and reliable — reading for all political junkies and concerned citizens. Read and get it HERE.
THE ENTHUSIASM GAP
Voter engagement in the presidential race
By Alan I. Abramowitz
Special Guest Columnist
Dr. Alan Abramowitz is one of the most distinguished and best known political scientists in the United States today. He has a rare talent for distilling data into appealing, fascinating accounts about American politics, as you will see in his guest column for the Crystal Ball today. Alan is the Alben W. Barkley Professor of Political Science at Emory University and the author of Voice of the People: Elections and Voting Behavior in the United States (2004, McGraw-Hill). –Larry J. Sabato, U.Va. Center for Politics
There is a large enthusiasm gap between Democratic and Republican voters in this year’s presidential campaign. The gap is evident in polling data, crowds at campaign rallies, turnout in primary elections, and campaign contributions. In a January 10-13 Gallup Poll, for example, 74 percent of Democratic voters said that they were “more enthusiastic than usual” about voting this year compared with only 44 percent of Republican voters. Forty-eight percent of Republican voters said that they were “less enthusiastic than usual” about voting this year compared with only 15 percent of Democratic voters.
The Democratic advantage has also been evident in turnout in presidential primaries. On February 5th, Super Tuesday, almost 15 million voters participated in Democratic primaries compared with fewer than 9 million in Republican primaries. One week later, more than 1.8 million voters in Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia participated in Democratic primaries compared with fewer than 800 thousand in Republican primaries. Even in Virginia, until recently considered a solidly red state, Democratic turnout more than doubled Republican turnout.
The Democratic advantage in turnout represents a big change from the 2000 presidential primaries, the last time both parties had competitive nomination races. In that year over 19 million votes were cast in Republican primaries compared with only 14 million in Democratic primaries.
Last but certainly not least, the leading Democratic candidates have raised far more money from individual contributors than their Republican counterparts. During 2007, according to reports filed with the Federal Election Commission, Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama raised a combined total of 208 million dollars from individual contributors. During the same period, the three leading Republican candidates, John McCain, Mitt Romney and Mike Huckabee, raised only 99 million dollars from individual contributors.
Like the Democratic advantage in primary turnout, the Democratic advantage in fundraising represents a reversal of the situation that existed during the 2000 presidential campaign. In that year, the two leading Republican candidates, George W. Bush and John McCain, raised a total of 130 million dollars from individual contributors while the two leading Democratic candidates, Al Gore and Bill Bradley, raised only 105 million dollars from individual contributors.
While the enthusiasm gap between the parties is real and important, there is also strong evidence of an enthusiasm gap within the Democratic Party: supporters of Barack Obama appear to be more enthusiastic about their candidate than supporters of Hillary Clinton. This difference is reflected in the larger crowds that Obama has been attracting at his campaign rallies and the larger number of individuals who have contributed to Obama’s campaign.
Although Obama and Clinton received about the same amount of money in individual contributions during 2007, 26 percent of Obama’s contributions came from individuals giving less than 200 dollars compared with only 12 percent of Clinton’s contributions. As a result, Obama’s contributor base was much larger than Clinton’s. And this gap appears to have expanded dramatically the first few weeks of 2008 according to reports issued by the two campaigns. As of the end of January, the Obama campaign claimed to have received contributions from over 350 thousand individuals while the Clinton campaign claimed to have received contributions from about 150 thousand.
Obama’s enthusiasm advantage may also explain his dominance thus far in the caucus states. Read the rest of it HERE.
While Barack Obama has received unrivaled praise from around the world, in some quarters it seems any of the three remaining contenders will go a long way toward dispelling the perceived stench of the Bush years. In regard to the three U.S. presidential frontrunners, Kennedy Alencar of Brazil’s Folha newspaper writes, ‘The three seem capable of positively exercising America’s undeniable global leadership, exactly contrary to George W. Bush - president for a period of eight years during which the United States went backwards.’
By Kennedy Alencar
Translated By Brandi Miller
February 8, 2008
Brazil - Folha - Original Article (Portuguese)
With Republican candidate for President Mitt Romney’s withdrawal from the race on Thursday (Feb. 7), the process of choosing candidates for the most powerful chair in the world narrowed for the better. The election takes place in November.
In the Republican Party, Senator John McCain has established himself as the presumptive candidate. On the Democratic side, Senators Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama are tied up in a battle that seems far from over.
For some analysts, Hillary and Obama are at the center of a somewhat suicidal duel - one undermining the other while McCain runs along alone. That’s an exaggeration. Anyone who saw the Democratic debates saw a high level contest. Were there any blows below the belt? There were. But they haven’t been the rule in the clash between Hillary and Obama – senators from the States of New York and Illinois.
In Brazil, part of the media treats Obama like the Collor phenomenon [Brazil’s President from 1990-92 ], a young man without the preparation and who could disappoint when it comes time to take difficult decisions. Fiddle faddle. If Hillary sounds more prepared in areas like the economy, Obama oozes more than charisma and is far from being a mere adventurer.
“Obamania” has been good for the United States. Young people who were apathetic before have begun to believe in politics. Hillary had to descend from her pedestal as favored candidate - and she learned in this process. The message of change promoted by Obama has been fully integrated into her campaign. She has mobilized her electorate. She has aired out her electoral platform. An eventual government of the Senator will probably not have the mark of an administration of wizened Washington insiders.
Despite being in favor of the Iraq War, McCain has progressive ideas about the treatment of illegal immigrants and the role of the Hispanic population in the country. He supports, for example, the settlement of the 12 million illegal immigrants there and reform of the immigration laws.
The challenge for McCain will be to resist appeals for him to tilt further to the right in order to win support from traditional Republican voters. In such circumstances, this Vietnam War veteran would be shooting himself in the foot. It doesn’t seem plausible that the conservative electorate would board a Democrat’s canoe because the Republican candidate from Arizona is too centrist. Does anyone think these voters would go for Hillary or Obama?
There is good news from the American primaries. Hillary, Obama, and McCain are some of the best people for charting America’s undeniable global leadership. The three seem capable of positively exercising this leadership, exactly contrary to George W. Bush - president for a period of eight years during which the United States went backwards. Under Bush, there were restrictions of civil rights and the use of torture as an officially sanctioned method of investigation. And he implemented an ineffective method of combating terrorism based on lies which resulted in the tarnishing of the image of the United States around the world.
READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, along with continuing translated foreign-language coverage of the U.S. elections.
Now be honest. Wasn’t Tuesday evening one of the most exciting nights ever in American politics? It had more drama and twists than many presidential general elections. The onrush of results and exit polls in twenty-four states–and let’s not forget about American Samoa–was dizzying and exhilarating.
Our readers, mainly political junkies, already know the basics. To refresh your memory, in case you are in the same kind of sleepless fog and hoarse stupor that we are, please see the two accompanying maps, one for the Democrats and one for the Republicans, showing which candidates won which states. The number appearing within the boundaries of each Super Tuesday state is the percentage of the vote for the winning candidate. In a future essay, once a little time has passed, we will return to the events of this remarkable day to evaluate further the nation’s first truly national primary. True, in 1988 the first Super Tuesday included twenty states, but fourteen of them were in the South and Border-South region. By comparison, 2008’s Super Duper Tuesday had a selection of states from every region.
Howard Fineman has an excellent piece on the folly that was Mitt Romney’s campaign.
The thing is, if he had run as the fiscal conservative, social moderate that he did in the past, he might have been a contender. I certainly would have considered him.
But his willingness to throw gays under the bus in order to get the GOP nomination made him untouchable for me and probably for many other moderates who might have liked his managerial experience.
But he gave up trying to woo moderates and independents and instead decided to run for President of the Republican Party instead of the United States.
Last December, I visited the Sloan Museum in my hometown of Flint, Michigan. There was an exhibit on the struggle to get a fair housing ordinance passed, a law that would outlaw racist practices that kept blacks from living in predominantly white areas. Demonstrations took place on the lawn of City Hall. In one photo, then Michigan Governor George Romney, Mitt’s dad, was chatting with the Mayor of Flint. He was in favor of the fair housing ordinance and spoke in support.
George Romney had courage. He was a popular governor and reminds us of a time when Republicans stood for fairness.
I have to think that, somewhere out there, George Romney has to be disappointed at his son’s lack of courage.
It may be an example of mass wishful thinking, but John McCain and hard-core conservatives seem to have taken a big step toward rapprochement.
In a speech draped with olive branches and punctuated by only a smattering of boos, the prohibitive favorite to win the Republican nomination told the annual meeting of the Conservative Political Action Committee that:
“We have had a few disagreements, and none of us will pretend that we won’t continue to have a few. But even in disagreement, especially in disagreement, I will seek the counsel of my fellow conservatives. If I am convinced my judgment is in error, I will correct it. And if I stand by my position, even after benefit of your counsel, I hope you will not lose sight of the far more numerous occasions when we are in complete accord.”
Jennifer Rubin, speaking for a goodly number of conservatives at Commentary.com, wrote that the speech was just what the doctor ordered:
“That take comes from the most loyal Romney supporters to a wide array of conservative voices. The ‘We’ll take Hillary’ view is clearly out of fashion. One speech a reconciliation does not make, but realistically there is only one way forward now for former McCain critics: Take credit and make the most of it.”
I’m not sure about the taking credit part because in the end conservatives not in the thrall of cannibals like Rush Limbaugh, Ann Coulter, James Dobson and other Malkintents knew that their failure to acknowledge McCain’s viability — and his failure to reciprocate — would mean likely defeat for the Republican Party in November.
The chances of McCain going down the tubes is still pretty good regardless of whether he tacks further to the right. Besides which, the conservatives’ core issues aren’t likely to play well enough this time around to make a difference. These issues include abortion, punitive action against illegal immigrants and standing with President Bush on the Iraq war.
February 8th, 2008 by JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
The end of former Massachusetts Governor Mitt Romney’s Presidential candidacy underscores the disconnect between the conservative movement’s leadership and the Republican electorate, according to conservative writer Josh Treviño.
Treviño, who has written speeches for the Bush administration, and is a longtime blogger — he founded the now-defunct tacitus.org and co-founded redstate.com, among others — is a thoughtful writer who stands back and analyzes and doesn’t regurgitate talk radio rhetoric or simply rewarm talking points. In a MUST READ post that must be read IN FULL he dissects the saga of Mitt Romney and the conservative leadership that in the past few weeks became his virtual cheer-leading section.
Here are some excerpts with a few comments:
The man who professed a love for “data” read this dataset clearly, and to his credit, he did the right thing. His concession speech at CPAC was in many ways a microcosm of his campaign: polished, perfect for the audience before him, with rhetorical homages to all the right tropes — and utterly divorced from his public record prior to this campaign.
Unlike many conservatives who have been fixated on stopping Arizona Senator John McCain, Treviño is looking at Romney’s totality and not falling into elective political amnesia. MORE:
Judging from the audio feed and reports on the ground, the conservative activists present went wild. This too was typical of his run: he won over much of the “leadership” of the conservative movement, and especially its media, which willingly transformed itself into pro-Romney organs for the duration. “Leadership” must be in quotes, as conservatives did not do an especially good job of following along with what Rush, Hewitt, National Review, and the California Republican Assembly recommended.
In reality, this has been the huge story the past few days. As I’ve said in previous posts, while on a long car trip I had the chance to listen to about 10 hours of conservative talk radio. And virtually all of the programs (with the exception of Fox’s John Gibson) had turned into non-stop radio commercials for Romney that also demonized “liberal” McCain nonstop as well. Hosts pleaded and cajoled listeners to get to the polls and vote for Romney, who was painted as the true conservative choice when compared to McCain — a characterization totally at variance with what they had said about Romney just weeks before. MORE:
In James Surowiecki’s The Wisdom of Crowds, the author argues that “market judgments” are often more swift and more accurate than “expert” opinion: where the Romney campaign is concerned, the Republican electorate proved Surowiecki right, in rejecting the claim that the authenticity of an object is wholly what that object claims for itself. Mitt Romney said he was a conservative over and over — but the voters demand more than mere rhetorical fealty to the concept. Whatever Romney says now that he seeks something from conservatives, the fact is that John McCain has more actual conservative accomplishment to his credit. The Republican masses ignored their putative leaders, grasped this, and acted accordingly.
February 7th, 2008 by JOE GANDELMAN, Editor-In-Chief
Just read THIS. Why, it sure is funny — a skit characterizing Mitt Romney’s supporters as people who’d commit mass killings. But when you read the stuff on the link, it isn’t Romney’s supporters or Republicans who seem a bit unhinged…
Oh, we’re sure we’ll get comments defending it but…sorry. It’s as unwanted, unnecessary and poisonous when it comes from the left as well from the right. A little less demonization on both sides in Campaign 2008 would do the political world a whole lot of good.
Yours truly is not a Romney supporter or a Republican, so spare us the characterizations in comments. But we do have a question:
Is there something in the water talk show hosts are drinking this week? Or smoking?
You have snarling conservative talkers turning their programs into virtual 3 hour Romney For President commercials and demonizing McCain nonstop, and you have this “satire” on a leading liberal talk show host’s show that wouldn’t have made it past the initial idea conference on Saturday Night Live during the frequently lame show’s lamest week.
This is a Guest Voice column by Michael Reagan, Ronald Reagan’s oldest son, who is also a popular radio talk show host. Guest Voice columns do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Moderate Voice or its writers.
Show Us The Shining City On The Hill
by Michael Reagan
Thanks to Mitt Romney, John McCain has all but wrapped up his party’s presidential nomination.
So where does the Republican Party stand at this point in a crucial election year? Well, consider that none of the potential nominees of the party — except maybe McCain to some extent — has ever gone out and helped any Republican get elected to anything.
Now that he’s suspended his campaign and is out of the race, if Mitt Romney still wants to be president of the United States some day let him call me up and I’ll give him the road map he needs to follow to become the GOP nominee in another year.
As I wrote a couple of weeks ago, the three men have all been working from the top down and not from the bottom up. As a result, the voters — the grass roots — are all over the landscape, and the primary results showed there’s no real consensus. They were with Huckabee, they were with Mitt Romney, they were with McCain, and some were with Ron Paul.
Mitt Romney didn’t do anything to gain the trust of the base, while McCain — who hasn’t yet won the trust of the base — is a familiar old face.
Are the 2008 elections destined to be bereft of the kind of divisive politics characterized by the Karl Rove electoral machine? Bernd Pickert of the German newspaper Die Tageszeitung writes, ‘The conservative wing of the Republicans, the party’s driving force under Bush, is torn by the battle between Huckabee and Romney and this time around will not have a major role. Finally, differences can be settled without taboos – finally reason and common sense have made a comeback to the debate in the United States.’
Commentary by Bernd Pickert
Translated By Ulf Behncke
February 6, 2008
Germany - Die Tageszeitung - Original Article (German)
The only clear winner of the elections on Super-Tuesday is named John McCain. The 71-year-old senator from Arizona has succeeded in restoring to himself the position of frontrunner. And yet both of his competitors, Mick Huckabee and Mitt Romney, claim that they too have been resoundingly confirmed – but that’s nonsense. They haven’t a chance. The Republican candidate for 2008 will be John McCain.
Things are different in the Democrats side: Hillary Clinton does indeed lead the delegate count, yet both she and Barack Obama have shown that they both have solid support from certain groups of voters. Clinton mobilizes the poor, the elderly, White women and Latinos. Support for Obama comes from Read the rest of this entry »
Bowing to the inevitable, Mitt Romney reportedly has suspended his quixotic run for the presidential nomination after winning only a small handful of states in the first month of primaries while squandering his sons’ inheritance in spending an outrageous $1.6 million per delegate won only to eat John McCain’s dust.
In a swan-song address this afternoon to the Conservative Political Action Committee in Washington that was Romney at his disingenuous best, he opted for dividing since he couldn’t conquer, declaring that he was falling on his sword because:
“If I fight on in my campaign, all the way to the convention, I would forestall the launch of a national campaign and make it more likely that Senator Clinton or Obama would win. And in this time of war, I simply cannot let my campaign, be a part of aiding a surrender to terror.”
The former Massachusetts governor is the latest Republican wannabe to learn to hard way, as did Rudy Giuliani, that being a liberal or moderate in conservative drag not only is a bad fit but doesn’t fool anyone in the ideologically rare air of GOP politics.
Romney had even out-Giulianied Rudy as a flip flopper, changing his stripes on abortion, stem cell research, gun control, the minimum wage, gay marriage and gays in the military, and nowhere more so than on health care where his views were a carbon copy of Clinton’s until he got the presidential itch.
The mathematical odds against Romney prevailing grew expodentially after he was trounced in the Super Tuesday primaries, giving McCain a commanding 703-293 lead in delegates. Mike Huckabee has 190, with 1,191 needed to clinch the nomination, meaning that Romney would have to win more than 80 percent of the delegates in play over the next month to remain competitive..
Romney’s exit is a further complication for hard-core conservatives who are dead set against McCain. Some conservatives had showed tepid support for Romney, but are now left with McCain, Huckabee and Ron Paul.
Mitt Romney is quitting his campaign for president, having made the final decision last night, according to a campaign source who asked to remain anonymous.
He made the final decision last night, as he was preparing his speech for Thursday at the Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington, the source said.
“The speech will speak for itself,” the source said.
“It’s virtually impossible for Romney or Huckabee to be the nominee just based on the arithmetic.”
– McCain adviser Charlie Black, quoted by NBC News, noting that McCain has 775 delegates, Romney had 284 and Huckabee has 205.
Added Black: “It takes 1,191 to clinch the nomination. There are 963 left to be chosen, so Romney or Huckabee would have to have all of them — all of them — to get to 1,191. Now you can’t do that because a majority of those 963 are chosen in proportional primaries, which means you’d have to get 100% if the vote to get them all.”
CNN’s John King and Dana Bash suggest that Mitt Romney may be ready to drop his White House bid. Mitt Romney and top aides Read the rest of this entry »
February 7th, 2008 by MICHAEL STICKINGS, Assistant Editor
I spent much of yesterday thinking about Super Tuesday and voraciously reading whatever I could get my hands on (rather, whatever I could click on). I stand by my initial view, expressed in the early-morning hours after California was called, that Obama won. By that, I don’t just mean he won more states (which he did) and delegates (which he also did) but that he won by blocking Clinton’s path to victory and by putting himself in a position to win the nomination, as well as by gaining both credibility and momentum by winning impressively all over the country and by drawing even, roughly speaking, with his opponent, recently the evident frontrunner.
Super Tuesday was supposed to be Clinton’s day, the “national” primary day that would propel her to the nomination. Obama was expected to do well in the early states, in Iowa and South Carolina, and he won both, but Clinton regained her footing in New Hampshire and seemed to have everything in place to meet early expectations, namely, expectations of victory. But now Obama is back, raising extraordinary amounts of money and looking good heading into the next set of primaries and caucuses. If he wins all or most of those votes — Louisiana, Washington, and Nebraska on Saturday; Maine on Sunday; Maryland and Virginia next Tuesday; Wisconsin and Hawaii the following Tuesday — he could pull well ahead of Clinton going into the big March 4 votes in Ohio and Texas. Clinton looks good in those two states, but the hybrid system in Texas may benefit Obama and, with Obama having a lot of time to campaign personally in Ohio — and his numbers tend to go up when he campaigns personally anywhere — he could pull that one out, especially if he’s riding the momentum of other victories.
This is not to say the race is over. No, this just seems to be the best-case scenario for Obama going forward, one that would give him a significant delegate lead, and perhaps even the perception of virtual invincibility, after March 4. What is amazing about Obama’s solid performance yesterday — and this is why I think he won in the larger scheme of things — is that he was able to put himself in this position, a position that seemed remote at best just last week. Of course, Clinton could still pull off victories over the next few weeks, surprising the media and slowing (if not reversing) Obama’s momentum, and could win both Ohio and Texas, and then, after that, other big states like Pennsylvania. And, of course, there may be (and are likely to be) some surprises along the way. And it could still be a long, tight race. Read the rest of this entry »
Some odds and ends, in no particular order, as we motor away from Super Tuesday into The Great Unknown:
Silliest Concern Going into Super Tuesday: That Hillary Clinton would win California because the people who attended a primary eve Grateful Dead fundraiser for Barack Obama would be so wacked out the next day that they wouldn’t make it to the polls.
Silliest Concern Coming Out of Super Tuesday: That evangelical blabbermouth James Dobson will have a major say in the November election.
The Ugly Rearing of Head Award: Goes to the return of the destructive identity politics have has dogged the Democratic Party in the past. Exit polls showed that most women voted for Clinton and most blacks for Obama.
Amazing Factoid: Obama has more money on hand than all of the other candidates in both parties combined, or at least until Mitt Romney writes himself another check.
Speaking of Money: Romney has spent $1.6 million per delegate.
The Big Super Tuesday Dig Award: Goes to former White House mouthpiece Ari Fleischer for saying that “There is no doubt . . . we hope and pray every night to run against Hillary Clinton.”
The Gratuitous Super Tuesday Dig Award: Goes to Clinton for saying that “I want to thank all my friends and family—particularly my mother, who was born before women could vote and is watching her daughter on this stage tonight.”
Phantoms of the Opera: Come Democratic Convention time, will those blackballed Michigan and Florida delegates matter?
The results suggest that money and political muscle are not the be-all and end-all for getting to the White House.
John McCain now has a clear path to the Republican nomination, while Mike Huckabee remains to haunt his hopes for a unified Party and may very well end up as his running mate.
Barack Obama has leveled the playing field with Hillary Clinton, cutting into her lead in the delegate count to the point where the once-certain nominee is now calling for more debates to bolster her chances.
What Obama and Huckabee have in common is that a year ago they were candidates with messages who didn’t have the money, the name recognition or the organization to challenge the Clintons’ political juggernaut, Rudy Giuliani’s 9/11 aura or Mitt Romney’s wealth.
But somehow, in the face of those odds, they persuaded different segments of the electorate that they represent the best hope for change from the dismal Bush years.
Six months ago, McCain, better-known but not beloved by conservatives, had slipped off the radar in the polls. But here he is, the front runner as those with more money, celebrity and willingness to pander have gone under.
Super Tuesday doesn’t justify a Pollyanna vision of Presidential politics, but it does undermine the view of cynics who claim that it’s only about money and power.
![[24 heurs, Switzerland]](http://cartoons.courrierinternational.com/illustrations/dessin/2008/02/i822070205-5Burki.jpg)
