With 17 percentage-point support, Sarah Palin was the top pick for president of 804 poll respondents who ID’d themselves as GOP or independents who lean GOP. Pawlenty was at 1 percent, along with Louisiana Gov. Bobby Jindal, U.S. Rep. Ron Paul and former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.

It was a similar story when pollsters asked who “best reflects the core values of the Republican Party.” Palin again drew the most support (18 percent), with Pawlenty again at 1 percent, this time with more company. Besides Jindal, Paul, Guiliani, other 1-percenters included Colin Powell, both President Bushes, and even Ronald Reagan.

Pawlenty has traveled the country speaking about attracting voters to the GOP who are “not yet Republicans” – while also anticipating the proposed “purity test” with his chastisements for New York congressional candidate Dede Scozzafava and U.S. Sen. Olympia Snowe for not towing the party line.

The poll was conducted Nov. 19–23 and has a margin of sampling error of plus or minus four percentage points for GOP voters and five points for leaning-GOP voters.

Thanks for the memories. Now please go away. Yes, we’re talking about you, Rudy Giuliani. And you, Wolf Blitzer. We no longer wish to be a swing state. Henceforth the residents of the state of Minnesota promise to vote reliably Democratic. Or Republican. It doesn’t much matter which — just as long as you people promise to stop showing up in our little slice of the frozen tundra seeking to feel our pain. But to memorialize the horrors visited upon us during the (still ongoing) campaign season, we offer — in honor of our favorite member of the Statewide General Election Canvassing Board — the G. Barry Anderson Awards.

Betty McCollum

Personally we thought the Andy Rooney date-rape skit had potential: It’s tough to recall now, but back in June it looked as if Al Franken’s Senate campaign was going to run completely off the rails. Despite two years of suffering through fish fries and potluck suppers in East Jesus Nowhere, his campaign was beset by controversies over improperly paid taxes and past writings. But it wasn’t the inevitable frothing of Minnesota Democrats Exposed that put the Franken campaign at risk of losing the DFL endorsement to a little-known challenger from the Trotskyite wing of the party. Rather it was the attacks from Franken’s fellow Democrats, led by Rep. Betty McCollum, that nearly doomed his candidacy. Her sanctimonious outrage over a (rather dull) Playboy article triggered a cattle call of Democratic politicians expressing faux outrage over Franken’s past writings. The comedian’s possibly pending triumph, however, raises hope for a 2014 Diablo Cody campaign.

T-Paw

He even cut off his hockey mullet, dammit: We really, really thought Gov. Tim Pawlenty was a shoo-in. When GOP muckety-muck Ken Mehlman hosts a Georgetown cocktail-and-mini-wiener gathering in your honor and it’s revealed that First Lady Mary Pawlenty refers to you as “45″ behind closed doors, it’s time to start measuring the curtains for Vice President Dick Cheney’s secret bunker, no? Pawlenty couldn’t have telegraphed his desire for the post any more strongly if he’d offered to take on eBay’s Meg Whitman in a steel-cage match. But when it became clear that Sen. John McCain’s appeal was largely limited to (some) former guests of the Hanoi Hilton and beer-distributorship scions, the drab choice of Pawlenty got scuttled for a moose hunter with a unique ability to arouse the Republican base with just three words: “Drill, baby, drill.” Does M-Paw now cry out “46?”

Xcel Energy Center

Let’s play hockey, please: Barack Obama decided to pee on the ice first. On the night that he finally slew the Pantsuited Beast once and for all, Obama showed up in St. Paul to stir the masses with his magic happy talk. A photo that would become one of the iconic images of the campaign was snapped in an Xcel elevator by Time photographer Callie Shell. It shows Obama, surrounded by his wife and advisers, beaming as if he’d just discovered indoor plumbing. Even better: nobody had time to organize a protest or arm the police with $50 million worth of the latest riot attire.

The Republican National Convention

What a gas: Did anyone other than St. Paul Mayor Chris Coleman, Minneapolis Mayor R.T. Rybak, Gov. Pawlenty and a few other insecure, ambitious politicians have any desire to host this four-day excuse to beat on protesters, arrest reporters, scream epithets at cops and hire really high-priced hookers? Does anyone care about whether the world at large has any clue where St. Paul, Minn., is located on a map and whether people view it as a “first-class” city? Can we please go back to being a Cold Omaha that rich people visit only when their nasal passages can no longer reliably process coke? Nobody was impressed by forced exposure to Minnesota Nice Passive Aggression and the Land of 10,000 Cops in Riot Gear. Anderson Cooper will not be returning this winter to hang out at the St. Paul Curling Club. If “this is what democracy looks like,” as the protesters kept insisting, we don’t want any part of it. To quote Meir Kahane and Kelly Clarkson: “Never Again.”

Palin-tology

Let them eat moose: That damned Katie Couric. She ruined everything. Before Sarah Palin performed her excruciating media belly flop on the “CBS Evening News,” she brought the house down at the RNC in St. Paul. Winking her way through a speech notable for its withering contempt for the Democratic presidential nominee, she had pundits (particularly the male variety) swooning. But even after it became clear that she was about as prepared to take up residence at the White House as your typical TV sports reporter, the GOP faithful were positively loopy for Palin. When she returned to Minnesota for a rally in Blaine (along with the old guy at the top of the ticket) just two weeks later, the delirious Palin-ites nearly filled an airplane hanger. But after it became increasingly clear that McCain had no chance of winning Minnesota, we were stuck with the surrogates. And unfortunately it wasn’t Bristol Palin. Or Levi Johnston. Instead we got the first dude — a man (to put it kindly) not known for his rhetorical gifts. But Minnesotans apparently weren’t offended by this snub. Todd Palin’s whirlwind two-day tour of the state was the biggest thing to hit Grand Rapids since the annual Judy Garland Festival.

The Crazy McCain Lady

Now she would have been a bold VP pick: When McCain arrived in Lakeville for a town-hall meeting in October, we were concerned that Minnesota might not be living up to expectations as a swing state. After all, recent McCain-Palin rallies had featured party faithful so riled up by the red-meat rhetoric that they’d spewed death threats at Obama and gnawed the legs off of anti-war protesters (OK, not really the latter). Were nice Minnesotans psychologically equipped to live up to such demanding standards? But then 75-year-old Gail Quinnell wandered up to the stage and let everyone know that we’re just as loony as the rest of the country. The “Crazy McCain Lady” utilized her moment in the political spotlight to declare Obama an Arab, earning a rebuke from McCain and her own skit on “Saturday Night Live.”

Cullen Sheehan

In October Harper’s Magazine reported allegations that Norm Coleman’s close pal Nasser Kazeminy financed lavish shopping sprees for the senator at Nieman Marcus. The Republican’s campaign initially refused to answer any questions about the controversy, brushing off inquiries from both Harper’s and Pioneer Press reporter Dave Orrick. “There are very awful things that are said about people on the blogs,” Coleman revealed. But it was the senator’s campaign manager, Cullen Sheehan, who really transformed the story into Intertubes gold. At an excruciating state Capitol press conference, he repeatedly refused to disclose whether Coleman had received any free suits from Kazeminy. Instead Sheehan recited this mantra over and and over and over and over again: “The senator has reported every gift he’s ever received.” Of course Suit-gate was soon trumped by Donor-gate, after two lawsuits alleged that Kazeminy attempted to funnel $75,000 to the senator.

Neiman Marcus

We’re pretty sure that was Rod Blagojevich trying on a houndstooth jacket over in aisle three: What other clothing store in the country can claim a place at the center of two different scandals during this election season? Coleman may have been responsible for the first free Neiman Marcus advertisement, but it took Sarah Palin to truly put the retailer in the national spotlight. After she was tapped as the VP nominee, the GOP brass were apparently fearful she might show up at the convention in camo waders and a blaze orange overcoat. So they tapped local Republican pooh-bah Jeff Larson to lead the Alaska governor on a $75,000, donor-financed shopping spree at Neiman Marcus. No word on whether she ran into Norm (or Nasser) while at the Nicollet Mall store.

Sixth Congressional District Voters

They’re not anti-American, but they’re definitely pro-Scandinavia: After the best-dressed homophobe ever to represent Minnesota in Congress spread her magic to the whole wide world via “Hardball,” it looked as though her congressional career might be over after just one term. Money poured in from across the country to support the underdog campaign of Elwyn Tinklenberg, and polls showed the race deadlocked. But the nice, racist Scandinavian voters of the Sixth Congressional District had an election day surprise for the pollsters. They gave Bob Anderson — a candidate who wasn’t endorsed by any political party, wasn’t invited to most debates, and hardly campaigned — 10 percent of the vote, thus ensuring that Michele Bachmann would return to Washington. We can vividly imagine the thought process of Ole and Sven while hovering over the ballot: “Bachmann? Isn’t she the one who wants to start gulags for everyone with un-American thoughts? Tinklenberg? I do kinda have to use the bathroom now that I think about it. Anderson? Well, I betcha he’s an awful nice gentleman. I’m sure he’d do a wonderful job in Washington, just like Coya Knutson.”

The Recount

This is dedicated to Eric Magnuson’s goatee: The fifth pile. The third pile. Wrongly rejected absentee ballots. Allegedly double-counted ballots. The 133 missing ballots. G. Barry Anderson. Marc Elias. Tony Trimble. The Lizard People. Flying Spaghetti Monster. G. Barry Anderson. Minnesotans have been forced to learn an entirely new lexicon and nomenclature to fully follow the U.S. Senate Contest That Refuses to Die. And now it’s clear that no matter how much we repeat the totemic words “G. Barry Anderson” over and over and over again, the recount is destined to drag on well into 2009. Even if we don’t end up in the swamps of south Florida with hanging chads and Cruella Harris haunting our dreams, it’s still been a rather gruesome process to behold. But here’s a simple proposal to bring this mess to an end: a lutefisk-eating contest on the state Capitol steps. The Uptake will carry a live feed. G. Barry Anderson will officiate. Whichever candidate can cram the most lutefisk down his throat in 15 minutes goes to Washington. With one caveat: He can never come back.

A little number crunching turns up a few surprises, like the fact that conservative broadcasting magnate Stanley Hubbard has so far given more to Senator Amy Klobuchar than he has to Norm Coleman. Or that Cargill MacMillan Jr.–heir to the Cargill fortune and roughly seven billion dollars wealthier than you–has given next to nothing: a thousand bucks each to Norm Coleman, John McCain and a Republican Congresswoman from California.

Shed no tears for Coleman–he’s received $24,700 in individual donations from Minnesota’s Forbes-listers, more than any other candidate.

Here’s how each Minnesotan ranked on the Forbes list, how much they’ve been giving, and to whom.

No. 42a, Whitney MacMillan

Cargill heirs Whitney MacMillan and Cargill MacMillan Jr. are tied for the distinction of richest Minnesotan (and 42nd richest American).

Born in 1929, Whitney MacMillan ran Cargill from 1976-1995 and was the last Cargill/MacMillan family member to head the company. Here’s what his political spending looks like:

$6,200 to Norm Coleman
$3,300 to Erik Paulsen
$4,400 to the Republican Party of Minnesota
$4,600 to Brian Davis
$2,000 to Michele Bachmann
$1,000 to John Kline
$250 to Rod Grams

MacMillan also sent $1,000 each to Republican Senators in Colorado, Georgia, Kentucky, Maine, and New Hampshire.

Total contributions: $25,750

No. 42b, Cargill MacMillan Jr.

Cargill MacMillan Jr. must not get as many party invitations as Whitney. There are just three contributions on record this cycle for the heir who saw his massive wealth double in the last year.

$1,000 to Norm Coleman
$1,000 to John McCain
$1,000 to Mary Bono Mack (R, CA)

Total contributions: $3,000

No. 102, Carl Pohlad

Carl Pohlad once told the Star Tribune: “All I wanted in life was to make a $100 a week and have two suits of clothes–one for summer and one for winter.” Notoriously frugal, Pohlad doesn’t throw much into politics. But he did earn himself the distinction as the only rich person on this list to give a large contribution to Barack Obama. And his donation to the Major League Baseball Commissioner’s office was mostly a contribution to the Democratic party. Of the $273,000 the office has contributed so far in this election cycle, 62% of that green turned blue. Still, he gave up $5,600 to the other side, with a sizable chunk of change going to the Norm Coleman-affiliated Northstar Leadership PAC.

$9,200 to Barack Obama
$5,000 to the Northstar Leadership PAC
$5,000 to MLB Commissioner’s Office
$600 to Norm Coleman

Total contributions: $19,800

No. 105, Richard Schulze

Best Buy founder Richard Schulze is sitting on $3.5 billion dollars and put most of his recent political contributions into the U.S. Senate race. Norm Coleman got $2,600 but Mike Ciresi, a one-time contender for Coleman’s seat, got $2,300.

$2,600 to Norm Coleman
$2,300 Mike Ciresi
$1,100 to the Republican National Committee
$1,000 to Jim Ramstad

Total contributions: $7,000

No. 123, Glen Taylor

So long as you are a Republican, Timberwolves owner Glen Taylor is a generous man. If you are the National Republican Senatorial Committee, Taylor is exceedingly generous–$45,000 generous. Here is a man who wants a Republican-controlled Senate and is willing to pay for it.

$45,700 to the National Republican Senatorial Committee
$7,200 to the Republican Party of Minnesota
$4,600 to John McCain
$3,100 to Norm Coleman
$2,000 to Michele Bachmann
$1,000 to Brian Davis
$1,000 to Erik Paulsen
$1,000 to John Kline
$200 to the Republican National Committee

Total contributions: $65,800

No. 163, Mary Janet Cargill

Mary Janet Cargill apparently does not like to get her money mixed up in politics. She contributed to no campaign for national office. She supported no party. Fair enough, with $2.5 billion who needs politicians? Wait.

No. 281a, Barbara Carlson Gage

Locked in a $1.7 billion three-way tie for least-rich richest Minnesotans (the 281 slot on Forbes’ list) are Barbara Carlson Gage, Mary Carlson Nelson, and Stanley Hubbard.

When she’s not christening ships, Barbara Carlson Gage is–truth is I don’t know what she’s doing. But here’s who she’s been giving to:

$4,600 to John McCain
$2,600 to Norm Coleman
$2,300 to Rudy Giuliani
$1,000 to Jim Ramstad
$500 to Brack Obama
$500 to Amy Klobuchar

Total contributions: $10,500

No. 281b, Marilyn Carlson Nelson

With just a few exceptions, the Carlson sisters’ money runs red. Here are Carlson Co. CEO Marilyn Carlson Nelson’s contributions for the current election cycle:

$8,110 to the National Republican Senatorial Committee
$6,900 to John McCain
$3,600 to Norm Coleman
$2,300 to Rudy Guiliani
$2,300 to Mike Ciresi
$360 to Elizabeth Dole

Total contributions: $21,270

No. 281c, Stanley S. Hubbard

Conservative broadcasting magnate Stanley Hubbard seems to be having the most fun of the bunch. He’s given overwhelmingly to the Republican cause, with a few notable exceptions. He gave $5,000 to Norm Coleman but $5,100 to staunch Democratic Senator Amy Klobuchar, who isn’t even facing re-election. He gave $2,300 to Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney (before backing McCain) but he gave the same contribution to one-time Democratic presidential hopeful Bill Richardson of New Mexico, where Hubbard owns four NBC affiliates.

$19,000 to the National Republican Congressional Committee
$10,000 to the National Republican Senatorial Committee
$10,000 to the Republican Campaign Committee of New Mexico
$4,600 to Michele Bachmann
$6,600 to Erik Paulsen
$6,600 to Dick Day
$5,100 to Amy Klobuchar
$5,000 to Norm Coleman
$5,000 to the Freedom & Security PAC
$5,000 to the National Association of Broadcasters
$5,000 to Northstar Leadership PAC
$5,000 to the Great Plains Leadership Fund
$4,600 to John McCain
$4,600 to John Kline
$2,500 to the Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee
$3,300 to Rudy Giuliani
$2,300 to Mitt Romney
$2,300 to Bill Richardson
$2,300 to Mike Ciresi
$1,300 to Pete Domenici
$1,000 to John Thune (R, SD)
$1,000 to Bob Schaffer (R, CO)
$1,000 to Terri Bonoff
$500 to Vito Fossella (R, NY)
$200 to the Republican Central Committee of South Dakota

Total contributions: $113,800

For more: Read “The Crunch,” Paul Demko’s ongoing multi-part series on Minnesota’s top-100 political contributors.

4:15 a.m.
I’m developing a purely anecdotal theory about Republican drunkenness: that it’s related to ideology. The less ideological arrive back at the headquarters earlier in the evening, between midnight and 1 a.m. These are, in chronological order, the Romney and the Giuliani supporters. Both are East Coast, urban college grad, corporate types. They like to drink and reminisce about the Harvard-Yale game, but they also like to wake up early, shave and not smell like booze at committee meetings. The Giuliani people are secular and more openly lecherous. So they tend to drink a bit harder and stay out closer to 1 a.m. The Ron Paul people party past 1 a.m., but not much. And they shave but they don’t showboat.

The ones who stay out the latest and come back the drunkest, I notice, are the Huckabee folks, the party’s rural conservatives. They believe in Jesus, in the hard-bitten way of the true alcoholic. If they ever sober up, it’ll be by the grace of the Lord; and if they intend to stay on the sauce and continue living, then they’ll really need His loving kindness. If you intend to be drinking heavily until closing time — 4 a.m. in the Twin Cities during the RNC — you had better walk home with Jesus.

I can’t place true McCainites on the alcohol-ideology matrix. I think they were all asleep by 9:30 p.m.

With approximately 80 percent of precincts reporting, Romney had won 53 percent of a Republican straw ballot.  Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, was in second place with 13 percent of the vote, just 21 votes ahead of Arizona Sen. John McCain.  Former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson and former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee were in a virtual tie for fourth with 8 percent of the vote, while former Mayor Rudy Giuliani of New York City trailed badly with just 4 percent of the vote.

The Democratic caucuses were much closer.  With about 90 percent of precincts reporting, Clinton had won 51 percent of delegates to Nevada’s state convention, with Obama close behind with 45 percent.  Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards was a distant third with 4 percent of the vote, while Rep. Dennis Kucinich, D-Ohio, was in fifth place, trailing uncommitted delegates, with less than 1 percent of the vote.The wins in Nevada were important to both Clinton and Romney, both of whom are looking for momentum going forward.  Romney needed the win in the delegate-rich Nevada caucuses to offset a near-certain loss in today’s South Carolina primary.  With the win, Romney appears likely to stretch his overall lead in delegates. In a statement, Romney said, “Whether it is reforming health care, making America energy independent or securing the border, the American people have been promised much and are now ready for change.”

Clinton, meanwhile, wins her second consecutive contest, and prevents Obama from building up steam going into next week’s South Carolina primary, where Obama holds a significant lead, according to polling.  In a statement, the Clinton campaign called the victory “a huge victory by overcoming institutional hurdles and one of the worst negative ads in recent memory.”  Clinton had decried Spanish-language ads run by allies of Obama, which called Clinton “shameless.”

The results in Nevada were a crushing blow to the faltering campaign of John Edwards, who has yet to finish higher than second in a primary or caucus.  Edwards had been rising in the polls in the last week, but ultimately faded, and will receive minimal support.  He will go into South Carolina desperately needing a win before the Super Duper Tuesday primaries and caucuses on Feb. 5.

“The more she’s attacked on personal grounds, the more sympathy that real person will generate.”

The shocking upset win of New York Sen. Hillary Clinton was the news of the day, and bloggers sought to answer the obvious question Tuesday’s win suggested: How the heck did Hillary win that race, especially after trailing in poll after poll last week?Markos Moulitsas Z

Huckabee received the support of 25 percent of respondents in the poll, five percentage points ahead of former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani.  Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., received the support of 19 percent of respondents.

Former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., was fourth with 12 percent.  Former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney received support from 9 percent of voters, and Rep. Ron Paul, R-Texas, earned 4 percent.

The poll is a reversal of a December poll that showed Giuliani leading his rivals, with Huckabee in second.

The poll was conducted Jan. 4-6, and covered 423 voters.  The margin of error was

And so it was that the candidates departed the cornfields of Iowa for the Granite State, where they would again go into small cafes and blueberry festivals.  They’ll go to the shores of Lake Winnipesaukee and the convenience stores of Nashua, and then they will stand for election in New Hampshire’s first-in-the-nation presidential primary, if one doesn’t count the Iowa or Wyoming caucuses.  And when the votes are tallied, one thing will be absolutely clear: this is no way to pick a president.

There is nothing wrong with New Hampshire, of course, nor with Iowa, nor Wyoming or South Carolina or any of the other states that hold primaries or caucuses before Super Duper Tuesday in February.  But the system that took us to Iowa last Thursday and to New Hampshire this Tuesday is, to put it nicely, insane.  On the Democratic side, Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., appears poised to win in New Hampshire, and thus to have essentially wrapped up the Democratic nomination for the presidency.  Never mind that 48 states and the District of Columbia have yet to weigh in on the matter; any pundit will tell you that momentum is obviously on the side of Obama and clearly against Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., who is obviously in second place nationally now.  Of course, Clinton looks ready to come in second after coming in third in Iowa, which will likely be the opposite of former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., who came in second in Iowa and will come in third in New Hampshire.  But everyone knows that Edwards is certainly out of the running, while Clinton can at least soldier on a bit more.And the Democratic field looks to be a bastion of sanity compared with what’s going on in the Republican Party.  At least Obama will have won two states; he’ll be the clear front-runner.  For the Republicans, former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee won Iowa, but is definitely not the leader, or so we’re told.  Neither is former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who came in second in Iowa and won the Wyoming caucuses on Saturday — except we don’t count the Wyoming caucuses, because traditionally New Hampshire comes after Iowa, so they’re being studiously ignored.

No, the current leader among the Republicans is Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., who came in fourth in Iowa behind former Sen. Fred Thompson, R-Tenn., and tied for fourth in Wyoming with no delegates, behind Rep. Duncan Hunter, R-Calif. , who got one delegate. (Then again, nobody takes Hunter seriously, so best to ignore him.) Now McCain looks like he might win in New Hampshire, so he’ll be in the driver’s seat, at least until we hit the next set of caucuses.

If you’re getting the sense that our system of selecting presidential nominees doesn’t have much to do with actual election results, you’re right. One can make the case that Obama is rising in the Democratic field because he’s running a great campaign that connects with new voters, or one can make the case that he’s rising because Clinton came in third in Iowa and subsequently faced a barrage of negative press.  One can make the case that McCain’s fourth-place showing in Iowa doesn’t matter because he didn’t run hard there, and therefore a win in New Hampshire is a win in his first major test.  One can also make the case that a national winner should be competitive nationally.

And therein lies the problem: none of this has anything to do with who’s winning more votes or delegates, and everything to do with pundits and journalists reading tea leaves and telling the masses what it all means.  Should Obama win New Hampshire, as appears likely, the press will dutifully report that he’s now a prohibitive favorite for the nomination.  And that will draw voters to him.  Should McCain win New Hampshire, as appears probable, the press will report on the McCain resurgence.  And that will draw voters to him.

Indeed, the story the press tells becomes the story of the nomination.  Romney’s one first and two seconds will be viewed as a failure, while McCain’s one first and two fourths will be viewed as success, because that’s how the narrative goes.  And Romney will suffer because of it, while McCain rises.

This is no way to select a president.  Yes, the images of Huckabee or Edwards eating at a diner in Laconia are swell, but they’re not particularly useful.  No, it’s time for us to start running a presidential primary based on actual voter preference, rather than media narrative.

It wouldn’t have to be hard.  Divide the country up into five groups of states, starting with the 10 smallest, then next-10 smallest, and so forth.  Run 10-state primaries every other week from the first Tuesday of February through the first Tuesday of April.  If you want, put Iowa and New Hampshire in the first group for old-time’s sake.  Craft a federal law that sets basic criteria for the primary: the value of each state in delegates, the means of apportioning delegates.  Give the parties some input, but make this a federally operated election — meaning it’s time to eliminate caucuses, and replace them with primaries.

Some will cry foul.  Are we not tampering with the state-by-state process our Founding Fathers envisioned?  In a word, no.  The Founding Fathers figured that members of a party would pick a standard-bearer, and didn’t really worry about how that happened.  That meant that until the middle of the 20th century, those decisions were made in proverbial smoke-filled rooms, with citizens cut off from the process.  Our current system evolved out of the bad old days, a quasi-functional procedure that gave some of the power to the people, but not, frankly, very much.  Iowa is the first caucus in the nation because it’s the first caucus in the nation; ditto New Hampshire and its claim to being the first primary.  Neither state was selected because it was particularly representative or their populations particularly politically astute; they just got there first, and now hold on to their positions by vowing to penalize any presidential candidate who doesn’t pledge fealty to those states.  And the candidates gladly do so, because as Romney can tell you, Iowa and New Hampshire matter more than other states because that’s what everyone says.

It doesn’t matter how we divide up the states and structure a better system.  Divide them by region, draw lots, pick based on literacy rates or ratings for “According to Jim.”  Use instant runoff voting or allow a plurality to decide.  But divide up the states, and set up a true and fair primary system that recognizes and prioritizes votes instead of the narrative.  Because the presidency is too important a position to select in a sloppy, half-assed manner.  And we shouldn’t let another cycle go by without fixing the system.

Here’s a sampling of what they had to say:“The Obama Phenomenon is Real”

Obama’s eight-point win in Iowa had liberal bloggers suggesting that Obama is in the driver’s seat for the Democratic nomination.  David Roberts, blogging at Grist, said that Obama’s victory cemented him as the front-runner.

Obama was always a gamble. Despite his missteps, there was always that faint hint of transcendence. The possibility of greatness, but also the possibility of horrible, cynicism-enforcing failure. The risk of a broken heart.

After tonight, though, the Obama phenomenon is real. He really did attract tons of new young voters. He really did sway tons of Independents and Republicans. It really does feel like a movement. A black candidate won big in a 95% white state. Something genuinely new seems to be happening.

Matthew Yglesias agreed.  “I think the manner of Barack Obama’s win is pretty impressive,” Yglesias said.  “I can’t be the only one who was a bit inclined toward a cynical roll of the eyes at the idea of winning on the back of unprecedented turnout, mobilizing new voters, brining [sic] in young people, etc. That sounds like the kind of thing that people say they’re going to do but never deliver on. But he did deliver. That’s impressive.”

Chris Bowers, writing at OpenLeft, also praised Obama’s campaign.  “Tonight, Obama won because he did something many campaigns have claimed they would do in the past, but never until now had never actually accomplished: he turned out young voters and new voters in record-smashing numbers,” he said.  “This has long been the holy grail of progressive politics, and until now no one had been able to pull it off. Well, Obama pulled it off. That is a remarkable and historic accomplishment. That is why he won.”

American Prospect blogger Ezra Klein, who has been an Obama skeptic, was nevertheless wowed by Obama’s victory speech:

Obama’s finest speeches do not excite. They do not inform. They don’t even really inspire. They elevate. They enmesh you in a grander moment, as if history has stopped flowing passively by, and, just for an instant, contracted around you, made you aware of its presence, and your role in it. He is not the Word made flesh, but the triumph of word over flesh, over color, over despair. The other great leaders I’ve heard guide us towards a better politics, but Obama is, at his best, able to call us back to our highest selves, to the place where America exists as a glittering ideal, and where we, its honored inhabitants, seem capable of achieving it, and thus of sharing in its meaning and transcendence.

Ken Ashford of The Seventh Sense posted a video of Obama’s speech, saying simply, “I put it up here not because it’s topical and of historical significance, but because it really is a good speech.  It reminds me of why I was drawn to the guy in the first place.”

Conservative blogger Andrew Sullivan said of the speech, “Simply put: he sounded like a president. The theme was not just change; it was a new unity. And as a black man, he helps heal the past as well as forge the future. This really was history tonight. To win so many white voices, and bring together so many minorities, and use the unifying language that leaves the toxins of race and partisanship behind: This was the moment America stopped being afraid. This was the America we have missed and have found again.”

Charlene Smith, writing for South Africa’s Thought Leader blog, praised Iowans for backing Obama.  “Damn, I love Americans,” she said.  “Just when you’ve written them off as hopeless, as a nation in decline, they turn around and do something extraordinary, which tells you why the United States of America is still the greatest nation on earth.”

And Jamia Wilson, writing at GirlHeadquarters, said that Obama had earned her support.  “Mr.Obama has the potential to change the way politics are done in this country. I am hopeful that Obama will stay true to his commitment to ‘cleaning up’ Washington, moving away from dirty politics and more toward honest, spirited, and principled social justice. Honestly, Hillary [Clinton] hasn’t proven to me that she is above the fray of ‘business as usual.’”

Huckabee: “One of the Great Political Stories”

In contrast to Obama, Huckabee’s victory drew very mixed reactions from conservative bloggers.  Jeff Kouba at Truth v. The Machine summed both sides up well.

Wow. One of the great political stories in recent memory, for a guy like that to come from absolutely nowhere, overtaking national figures like McCain and Rudy, and flying past Romney who was poured tons of money and time into Iowa.

Now, will Huckabee be able to run nationally? My guess is no. In 1988, Pat Robertson finished a strong second in Iowa, but did poorly in New Hampshire and wasn’t really competitive after that. The evangelical support among Republicans in Iowa is not exactly the national Republican average. In addition, Iowa doesn’t always pick the eventual nominee, in both parties, so this race is hardly over. It’s just beginning.

I’d rather be governed by Huckabee than Robertson any day of the week, but I do have concerns about Huckabee.

Stephen Green of Vodkapundit made those concerns clear as he blasted the “corn-sucking idiots” who supported Huckabee.  “I’ll put this in language even your tiny little Iowa brains can understand: What the f*** [sic] is wrong with you people?” he said.  “The news coming out of Des Moines (literally, French for ‘tell me about the rabbits, George’) tonight is distressing in the extreme. 32 years ago, your Democratic brethren took one look at Jimmy Carter — the worst 20th Century President bar Nixon, and the worst ex-President ever — and declared, “That’s our man!”

But Dave at NixGuy.com blasted back at Green, saying, “The condescension fairly drips here and it’s not only in the post, but check the comments as well.  Somehow I don’t think it’s going to be very persuasive among the hillbilly class.  There is a case to be made against Huckabee, but denigrating his faith, his profession, his region is not the way to do it.”

Rich Lowry at The Corner said that Huckabee has a shot at the nomination: “In the end, the devastating Huckabee line was the one about voting for the candidate who seems like someone you work with rather than someone who laid you off. Both he and Obama rejected their party’s establishments and old-style politics….Huckabee rejected (at least notionally) Rovian zero-sum politics and the Washington GOP establishment. My friend thinks Huckabee has staying power and is going to be strong in South Carolina and Florida. Evangelicals are now fully vested in him, so he has a strong base going forward.”

Other Dems: Hillary Clinton Stumbles, John Edwards Rumbles, Mike Gravel Grumbles

While Obama’s win was the big story, the third-place finish of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y., was almost as big a story.  Even before the results were in, Swopa at FireDogLake criticized Clinton for not being bold enough:

For most politicians, throwing out some passionate true-believer rhetoric to reassure the base would be child’s play. But Clinton seems determined to live up to her overcautious stereotype, and you can see “microtargeting”-obsessed pollster/campaign guru Mark Penn checking off the notes she’s supposed to hit (e.g., strong with women, people who liked Bill Clinton, and those who value experience) in her messaging.

Marc Armbinder laid out a possible Clinton comeback plan, including a need to “find some way to go negative against Obama. Some Clinton advisers and aides say that the campaign have a storehouse of opposition research — old and new — that they’ll use against Obama. In Iowa, being directly associated with negative attacks is seen as uncouth and un-Midwestern; in New Hampshire, rude remarks as as welcome as questions and answers.”

Steve Benen of The Carpetbagger Report said that Clinton was still alive for the nomination, but: “Clinton isn’t going anywhere; she has the resources to keep the fight going over the long haul, and has solid support in Feb. 5 states. But now, she’s the underdog, and has no obvious avenues to retaking the lead.”

Former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., drew praise for a feisty concession speech that sounded more like a victory speech.  Josh Silverstein at Joshing Politics said simply, “What an amazing speaker, and what a great President he would be for our country.”

But Ed Brayton at Dispatches from the Culture Wars said that it was still an uphill climb for Edwards.  “Edwards needs a strong showing in New Hampshire. I don’t think he necessarily needs to win it, but he can’t take a big step back like only getting 10% while Hillary and Obama finished in the 40% range.”

Former Sen. Mike Gravel, D-Alaska, angrily reacted to reports that he was dropping out of the race after finishing with no delegates in Iowa.  J. Skyler McKinley, Gravel’s multimedia coordinator, said: “MSNBC pundit Keith Olbermann has incorrectly declared that Sen. Gravel has dropped out of the race following the January third caucus in Iowa. This is not true, and Sen. Gravel is still an active member in this race. We are requesting that MSNBC and Keith Olbermann retract their statement, and issue an apology to the campaign for promoting blatantly false misinformation.”  Josh Marshall at Talking Points Memo snarked, “And you thought the comedy writers were on strike …”

Finally, Sen. Chris Dodd, D-Conn., and Sen. Joe Biden, D-Del. earned plaudits on the way out of the race.  Prof. Marcus at And Yes, I DO Take It Personally praised Dodd, saying, “i was hoping for a better showing for chris dodd last night than he got, but i’m also not surprised… not only does defending the constitution, the rule of law, and calling for accountability barely register on the national media and political radar screen, damn few voters have really tuned in to what’s happening to our country.” [Capitalization as in original piece]

And Tara Rowe of The Political Game said of Biden: “Whoever gets the Democratic nomination sure as hell better pick up Senator Biden as an advisor. Secretary of State? Yes, that too. Biden had the experience, the foreign policy experience. Something none of the candidates have is foreign policy experience and don’t believe Hillary when she tells you that she does.”

Other GOP Candidates: Mitt Romney Works to Spin Defeat, Giuliani Works in 9/11

The big loser on the Republican side Thursday night was former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who finished a distant third to Huckabee. D.J. Drummond at Stolen Thunder blasted Romney as a flip-flopper.  “Romney has been trying hard lately to sell himself as a new version of Reagan, but Massachusets [sic] is not California, and Romney’s no Reagan Republican. For one thing, Romney changed his mind – as he has a right to do – on a number of issues, but unlike Reagan, who made the changes a number of years before he ran for President, Romney’s switches are recent enough to justify the `flipper’ tag pinned on Kerry.”

Huckabee backer Kathryn Jean Lopez at The Corner griped, “I wonder what this means about Romney’s get-out-the-vote organization. Wasn’t it supposed to be all that?”

Romney supporter Hugh Hewitt held out hope for a Romney resurgence.  “Shades of 1976 –the long march begins,” Hewitt said, referring to Ronald Reagan’s ultimately futile challenge to then-President Gerald Ford.  Baseball Crank mused, “Does anyone have the heart to tell Hugh that the winners in Iowa in 1976 were Carter and Ford, the eventual nominees?”

Bloggers immediately mocked former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani for his reaction to a distant sixth-place finish in Iowa.  “None of this worries me – Sept. 11, there were times I was worried,” Giuliani said, referring to the terrorist attacks on New York City, as he often does.  Melissa McEwan of Shakesville said, “Satire is officially dead.”  James Joyner of Outside the Beltway added, “Please, it’s simply unseemly to keep invoking the 9/11 attacks for even the most trivial matters.”  And Steven Taylor at Poliblogger said, “Giuliani is starting to sound like a senile old war veterans who can only talk about the day he had to jump out of a flaming bomber while Japanese Zeros tried to shoot him from the sky. Or, perhaps, one’s Grandpa who had to walk uphill to school in the snow.”

Finally, Paul Mirengoff at Power Line said he though he knew the biggest loser on Thursday.

But the deeper answer, I think, lies in the perception that Republicans haven’t governed very well during the past seven years. If the Republican Congress had performed better in general and if President Bush had handled the war in Iraq better (or arguably if he hadn’t launched it), one can easily imagine that George Allen (or perhaps Bill Frist) would be the frontrunner for the nomination right now. The perceived failures of Congress and of the president knocked both of these Senators out of the box, and Bush’s lack of popularity has Republicans flirting with non-traditional Republican options.

There’s irony here because I would argue that the flaws of the Republican Congress and of the Bush presidency don’t stem from adherence to conservative principles. But life is unfair. I’ve long suspected that the Republican party (which is synonymous in large segments of “the public mind” with “conservative”) isn’t perceived as having performed well enough to elect a mainstream conservative president this year. It may turn out that it isn’t viewed as having performed well enough even to nominate a mainstream conservative.

Clinton widened her lead over the four major Republican candidates she was matched up against.  Her widest lead was over former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney, who she led 54 percent to 38 percent.  The tightest matchup was with former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who Clinton led 49 percent to 44 percent.  Clinton also led Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., and former Tennessee Sen. Fred Thompson. 

Sen. Barack Obama, D-Ill., was tied nationally with Giuliani, but led the other Republican candidates.  His largest lead also was over Romney, who he led 52 percent to 45 percent.

The poll did not test matchups with former Sen. John Edwards, D-N.C., or former Republican Gov. Mike Huckabee of Arkansas.  The poll of registered voters was conducted November 11-14, and has a margin of error of