I attended two family functions in and around the Thanksgiving holiday, and nary a political word could be heard. It could be that everyone was on their best behavior. More likely is that everyone is so sick of the BS out of Washington that it was more interesting to talk about whether you liked light or dark meat.
My bet is I'm not the only one to have experienced this phenomenon. Probably few people gave a darn about the fortunes of Hillary Clinton or Rudy Giuliani or other political candidates during the past week. A week, mind you, when according to polls those front-runners were ahead by less than they had been.
My other bet is that's just where the political pros in Washington, D.C. want us. To be disinterested and ignore what's going on there. The precedent was earlier this year with the immigration reform agreement forged by President Bush and Senate leaders. Sen. John McCain was quoted as saying he wanted the measure passed before it underwent scrutiny. That's because he knew what would happen once we got a look at it. He was right.
While we certainly have more important, or at least more pressing matters to attend to in our lives, we have to remain vigilant to what our political leaders are doing. White meat vs dark meat is still more conversational, but we can't let our attention stray too far from what the politicians are doing, because more often than not, it will be fowl.
---
One of the ironic things about the presidential primary season that's soon to be upon us -- New Hampshire voters can collect and submit their absentee ballots beginning Dec. 10 -- is that with all the states rushing to be in the first group that votes and help determine the candidates, it will be the states that remain later in the calendar that will probably have the final say on who our choices will be in the general election.
States for years have been inching their primaries earlier and earlier so their voters would have a stronger influence on who will be the nominees. The greatest example is California, where state leaders decided the largest state should have the biggest impact on the races.
The inching became an all-out race after 2004, when John Kerry surprised everyone by winning the Iowa caucuses and New Hampshire primary in the first two weeks and ran away with the Democratic nomination. We should all have such power.
Fast-forward to now, where you have on the Democratic side a near-dead heat between Clinton, Barack Obama and John Edwards in polling for the Iowa caucuses; and the Republicans have Mitt Romney leading in Iowa and New Hampshire and Rudy Giuliani ahead in most other locations.
In other words, the first couple of weeks might not decide anything. I see nothing changing the GOP condition. The Democratic race would only be locked up early if Clinton wins Iowa decisively, which could still happen.
So, my crystal ball says don't put too much stock in the first couple of primaries this time. Things won't get sorted out into the front-runner and challengers until Super Tuesday, Feb. 5, when 15 states have primaries and a few others have caucuses or conventions. Clinton could lock things up by then if she gets as many votes as polls currently indicate.
For the GOP, and the Dems if Hillary weakens, the nomination will probably come down to March 4, when primaries will be held in Massachusetts, Rhode Island (for Democrats), Vermont, Ohio and Texas. The New England states could put Romney over the top or be his last stand. They should also favor Hillary. Texas simply has a lot of delegates. Ohio will again be a major battleground state where the parties will want their candidate to poll well.
Ironic, because by March 4, California and most other states will have already voted, and once again it will be just four or five states that make the decision.
