Who's it gonna be?
Part of me wants the results of tonight's caucuses to shed light on the inner biases that keep this country a step behind the rest of the world. If you think about it, all the major front runners have something "wrong" with them, at least according to some ignorant part of the population. A Mormon, an African American, a woman, a New Yorker, ANOTHER guy from Hope, Arkansas. Who wins? Which kind of Christian voters turn out for which kind of Christian?
And on the Democratic side: if history has any bearing at all then I'd say it will be between Edwards and Clinton because Edwards ran with Kerry who understood the importance of a ground campaign when Dean put all his eggs in the new-media basket and got whalloped accordingly. Then again, Mrs. Clinton is backed by mostly former Kerry people or other establishment heavies who can still work a midwestern state with the best of 'em.
So let's see - I'll be wrong, but I'll go with:
Democrats: Edwards over Hillary by no more than 3 points, with Obama not far behind. Who knows, perhaps the first 3 lose to Dodd or someother Kerry-esque, standard issue candidate. Actually, Dodd's not so bad.
Republicans: Mormon or Arkansan. Oh the choices. It's more bible-belty, though I think Mitt is the more mature candidate. But I saw Huckabee on Leno last night (I only watched 'cause of the issues discussed in yesterday's post - and those predictions were wrong) and he was great. And he rocked a bass guitar. I don't think he'd make it to the end, but he's really damn likable. And - having just watched "Jesus Camp," if people are going to pray to cardboard cutouts of Christian presidents, at least I'd like that one. And maybe the Iowan runner vote is very strong, in which case, Norris and Iowans will agree on Huckabee.
We'll see what happens . . . .