Reagan and Darth Vader

Jack Kelly observes the carnage and brutality that have occupied the Republican field lately and concludes:

Both Sen. McCain and Gov. Romney are too flawed to reunite and reinvigorate a dispirited Republican party. There is only one candidate who can do that. And she might lose to Barack Obama.

As one who has followed the Obama campaign very closely, and as the son of a family of Kennedy Democrats who came to their senses to vote Reagan in 1980, I can say with certainty that something fundamental has changed again this year. The only question is how it plays out.

There are plenty of 50 somethings on autopilot, with hazy, thoughtless memories of the 1990s. If they show up to vote en masse next Tuesday - if nothing else has interrupted the dial tone politics - then there's every chance that Hillary continues her Vader march to the nomination. And anyone of a certain age can hum that tune.

But the rebel coalition is gaining strength, and unlike the faceless troops of empire , it's comprised of wookies, independents, idealistic farm kids, Admiral fish-guy, and boozer old semi-wise men from Nantucket (hey, even his staunchest opponents will admit Ted's a legislative genius). It's a motley crowd, and the odds are long, and there's a certain amount of believing in airy concepts like the Force that seems to be involved.

If Hillary wins the nomination she will be substantially weakened, because everyone will have been reminded so acutely of the smash-mouth partisan era to which we will be returning. If Hillary wins the nomination it will be the Republicans race to lose - but don't put it past them. With all of the seething anger over who makes the best pseudo-conservative, there will almost certainly be a segment that stays at home.

But that's later. At this point, the choice still exists between Obama and four to eight years of Death Star politics.

The Hawkeye Howdown

You can come up with any plausible scenario: Romney seems to be leading the pack on the Republican side, at least the last time I refreshed my web browser. But Huckabee went Hollywood last night with an appearance on Leno, and McCain has mustered a sudden burst of support - to the point where a 3rd-place showing in Iowa would be a victory. Any combination of Hillary, Obama and Edwards in the top three spots seem squarely within the realm of possibility for the Democrats, although with vastly different implications for each conceivable order.

Some observations:

• Romney might be emerging as split-the-baby consensus candidate. Mormonism is somewhat strange, but leave it to the Lefties to hammer away on that issue and thereby appear intolerant.
  
  
• Fred should hang it up. A likable old hound dog, but zero competitive chops.
  
  
• It's hard not to want Obama to trounce Hillary. She's ultimately a dreary candidate, and despite what legions of pure Democrats would like to believe, Bill won't be president again - and what does that say about women that people would think along such lines?
  
  
• The nightmare scenario: Hillary against Huckabee. The next ten months would become the most brutal chapter of the American culture war imaginable - a bone-shattering, blood and viscera duel between the Sean Hannity and Michael Moore wings of the electorate. And whatever the outcome, it would continue long after the inauguration.
  
  
• It's extremely unlikely Edwards will take first place, but he's the Republican dream candidate. His message would seem very sour in the general election.
  
  
• Guiliani is playing a very, very risky strategy by waiting out these early contests. He may be buried in the mind of the general voting population in the next two weeks, since all of the talk will be about Romney, Huck and (possibly) McCain.

Let's play ball. Also, don't miss Novak's column, titled (ahem) Hillary's Premature Triangulation. He may be a flinty old gorgon, but old man Bob has lost none of the gimlet-eyed political analysis that has made him notorious.