If reports of shifting concerns among the electorate -- away from the war, toward the pocketbook -- are correct, then the reasons that caucusgoers give for why they participated rather than whom they supported will hold today's longer term significance in the nominating process. Such a shift could, and probably would, also spell doom for the GOP in the general.
In something of a tautology, the New York Times this morning says "the shift suggests that economic anxiety may be at least matching national security as a factor driving the 2008 presidential contest as the voting begins." Yet the rising anxiety is the shift; at once the cause and the effect; both the mover and the moved.
Nevertheless, although Iraq may still dominate the Iowan Democratic mind, the article notes that "the war is becoming a less defining issue among Democrats nationally, and it has moved to the back of the stage in the rush of campaign rallies, town hall meetings and speeches that are bringing the caucus competition to an end. Instead, candidates are being asked about" -- and are better prepared to answer, I'm sure, as a result of internal-polling forewarnings -- "the mortgage crisis, rising gas costs, health care, immigration, the environment and taxes."
How the shift could effect the dynamics of the Democratic race is, of course, still anybody's guess. John Edwards' anti-corporate spiel could take off, or Obama's exhortations for a change in leadership style could take root, or, for that matter, voters could identify Hillary with the Clinton prosperity of the '90s and act, as well as think, nostalgically. The electoral leap from war to economics could also benefit Clinton by overshadowing her history of having helped to get us into the overseas mess in the first place.
Any one of these Democratic scenarios is equally plausible, and as of this morning, at least, the odds of each outcome are roughly equal as well. But within the GOP, the predictability factor grows even more erratic and the shift could be seismic in results.
It would seem that the Huckster is already history, despite his Edwardian populist rhetoric that could have had lasting appeal even among rank-and-file Republicans, who are beginning to suffer economically as much as actual human beings. But the Huck is toast, because he toasted himself, the poor demagogue. His sleaze finally outdistanced his aw-shucksism.
So GOPers are left, it would further seem, with only Romney and McCain.
At first blush, the tempered war in Iraq would appear to benefit McCain -- he can awe the crowds with his rapturous correctness on the matter of troop levels. Indeed, on the campaign trail it's reported he "is off of the defensive and now positions himself as having been prescient about what would work to quell the violence" -- until Iraq re-materializes as a massive fireball, anyway.
Yet paradoxically, the shift in voter attention away from the war could also do harm to McCain. He's not known for his domestic-fix-it skills, or for anything domestically, except fixing problems for millionaires.
So enter Mitt: the man for all ages, all seasons, all ideologies; the man who will happily be whatever you want him to be, and, in fact, always has been. He is troubled not by a principled bone in his opportunistic body. The chameleon is an insult to Mitt's abilities, and to shame Mitt shall put the beast.
He has already "begun talking about expanding health care coverage," an issue from his embarrassing liberal past that he downplayed while fighting the previously threatening Islamofascists with the bravest and best of them. But Mitt can turn on the proverbial dime. If it's health care that worries you now, you're in luck, because that's always been Mitt's chief worry, too.
Maybe it's the mortgage crisis that keeps you up at night? Again, you're in luck, because that happens to be at the top of Mitt's list of priorities, and he'll fix it any way you want.
Or maybe it's rising gas costs, or immigration, or the environment or taxes that top your list. Excellent. They top Mitt's, too. And as for the cures, he happens to agree with you, you lucky thing.
I'm still betting that McCain threads the needle through New Hampshire and beyond, largely by default. But if Republicans opt for Romney, oh how they'll pine for their martial expert after the nomination process is over and done.
Because the war isn't.