There Goes the Neighborhood

The New York Times writes us up as a second-home haven in its real estate section.

Governor Romney Takes His Leave

At today's CPAC conference, Mitt Romney departed the Republican primary field. Given the way he campaigned, I am not sorry to see him go. I was sorry to see the way he campaigned.

I have two grievances about his New Hampshire campaign. First, he just didn't show up. I direct a Public Policy Center at a college in New Hampshire. I didn't meet him. I met Senator McCain, Governor Huckabee, Congressman Paul, Congressman Tancredo, and unfortunately missed Congressman Hunter's event on campus. I saw the Mitt-mobile around town once or twice and was introduced to one of Governor Romney's sons by a student trying to bring Governor Romney to campus for a public lecture. What was he doing that he didn't have time to hit one of the few major colleges in the state?

Second, I know what he was doing with some of that time--spending his own money to saturate the primetime televsion hours with superficial, cynical, negative television ads. That's a fast way to alienate New Hampshire voters. It's one of the virtues of having the first primary here. The New Hampshire primary is designed for what McCain did--a rampage of townhall meetings where he took Q&A from the audience until they were satisfied he had heard and understood their concerns. And don't get me started again about Romney in Michigan.

Here's the irony. Based on his record and his personal resources, Governor Romney could have had the nomination in a walk. A Republican president in 2009 would have to work with a Democratically controlled legislature and would face a number of tough challenges. Maybe Governor Romney hasn't been keeping up with current events, but he actually faced an even more extreme version of that scenario in Massachusetts and had a reasonable record to show for it. All he had to do was to make the case that he worked with the Democrats to deliver results for the citizens of his state while holding the line on conservative issues. The problem with Senator McCain's record is that he has not held the line on conservative principles in his commendable efforts in the Senate to work with Democrats to deliver results. (Campaign finance and immigration are two prime examples.) An honest and positive campaign on that issue, without the free-lunch, supply-side economic rhetoric and the negative ads, would have generated a lot of support.

Enjoying Winter in New Hampshire

Back from the Voting Booth

The VoxWife and I cast our ballots this morning. There was one vote for Senator McCain and one vote for Senator Obama. It seems like that's where a lot of people are today. Consider the end of this article in The New York Times today:

In the Republican ranks, Mr. McCain, 71, is a curious bookend to Mr. Obama. He is the oldest candidate in either party besides Ron Paul, another Republican, who is 72. Yet he draws hundreds of young people at some events.

Mr. McCain drew many hundreds when he spoke at Dartmouth, a number exceeded only by the 2,000 students who showed up for Mr. Obama.

“He is seen as Washington but not in it,” said Ronald G. Shaiko, an associate director of the Nelson A. Rockefeller Center at Dartmouth who works with focus groups. “They think he’ll upset the apple cart.”

Mr. McCain admits to admiring Mr. Obama’s appeal as a “wonderful thing” and has taken to borrowing a line or three. He has been channeling Mr. Obama, calling on Americans to “serve a cause greater than their self-interest,” a theme from his campaign in 2000.

At forums, he may hand the microphone to a young man with ONE, a group dedicated to eradicating what it calls “stupid poverty” and disease. The group has more than 17,000 members in New Hampshire.

At Dartmouth, Emily Goodell, 18, sat astride a strange fence, contemplating a vote for Mr. McCain or Mr. Obama.

“It is kind of a strange thing since they have different views on many of the issues,” Ms. Goodell said. “They come across as genuine. I trust them.”

Nearly as striking is the absence of young people on the trail traveled by Mitt Romney and Rudolph W. Giuliani. Mr. Romney visited Dartmouth, but the earth did not shake.

“He went straight to the medical school,” Professor Shaiko said. “He wanted to talk to adults. He has no presence here.”

Still, the youth vote has an uncertain mojo. For the moment, Mr. Obama is like catnip for many people younger than 30. Less certain is if his “it moment” will be sustained.

The results of the Rockefeller Center focus group before the Democratic debate in September at Dartmouth may be instructive. Mr. Obama’s stock dropped after he stood shoulder to shoulder with more experienced rivals.

“His talking about his work in the state legislature while another candidate is talking about negotiating with the North Koreans was a turnoff,” Professor Shaiko said. “They found him coming up short on experience.”

It has been an interesting turnaround for Senator Obama in those three months, and it has been equally interesting to see this aura emerge around him and Senator McCain. It does not seem to have much to do with the two parties, either. The longest line at the polling place was still the one to change affiliations back to undeclared.

Senator McCain Visits Dartmouth

Senator McCain included Dartmouth on this weekend's slate of town hall meetings, speaking to a capacity crowd in Alumni Hall last evening. I may not agree with him on some issues, but there's no arguing that he's an authentic statesman with a record in public service that does merit presidential consideration. That experience puts him in select company in this campaign. It was nice to see so many students at the event. Several of them asked good questions.

The event focused on two topics, the war in Iraq and federal spending. On both of these topics, McCain began with a sincere acknowledgement that it has been Republicans in the majority who have made major mistakes. On the war, McCain pinned the blame on Rumsfeld and insisted that the "surge" strategy was working. In response to a question by a student, however, I think McCain stumbled a bit in trying to describe how the war would eventually come to an end. Is it nothing more than we leave and declare victory when the troops are home? I don't think the Republicans, even the authentic ones, will have much chance for electoral success until they can paint a picture of a successful end to the war.

On federal spending, McCain linked runaway spending to corruption and the jail time now being served by former members of Congress. He sounds really good when he's talking about this, but he showed no signs of addressing my big frustration with federal spending. Does he really think we can close the budget deficit only by eliminating pork barrel projects? If so, then he must think that a big chunk of the defense budget is pork. He must think that plenty of health-related and entitlement spending is pork. And if that's the case, then he shouldn't tell me about a $233 million bridge to nowhere. He should be telling me about $233 billion (or more) in cuts that he's willing to make. And, of course, he cannot combine silence on that with the combination of "not wanting to raise your taxes" and "needing to spend more on defense." I've heard worse, but I still would have liked a bit more "straight talk" on the budget. If he were saying that, I'd be working for him.

Overall, a great event. As John Gregg wrote in his recent "Primary Sources" column for The Valley News, the Republican candidates have passed through this area, but they haven't had much of a presence. So it was particularly nice to see one stand up and answer direct questions.

UPDATE: An article from the student paper on the event.

Speaking Volumes

If you read carefully, you can learn quite a bit about Senator Clinton's presidential campaign from a recent interview with her in the local Valley News. Here are the opening paragraphs:

West Lebanon -- U.S. Sen. Hillary Clinton yesterday rejected suggestions that she is running a scripted presidential campaign that is avoiding substantive answers, saying she is the most experienced Democrat in the field to take on Republicans.

“I want to govern as a progressive Democrat, but I'm going to run a disciplined campaign that is a winning campaign, and part of that means staying on message, so that's what I do, day in and day out,” Clinton said yesterday in a meeting with Valley News editors and reporters.

Someone will have to explain to me how she can simultaneously "stay on message" while rejecting suggestions that "she is running a scripted presidential campaign."

And what's this about being the most experienced Democrat? The article suggests an answer:

The former first lady, who recently turned 60, said her political activism dating back to the 1960s, and vast exposure to the national spotlight, leave her “better prepared to take on what needs to be done in Washington.” And she said her experience as first lady in the turbulent Clinton White House, and in running for Senate in her adopted state of New York, have steeled her to take on a general election campaign for the presidency.

“Speaking from experience, until you've been through it, you have no way of knowing how you are going to react. It is not an intellectual exercise; it is visceral,” Clinton said. “At the end of the day, I think I'm in the best position to win.”

So the experience in question is not experience in governing. It's experience in campaigning. Although it may not seem like it today, that campaign will end. Then what? More from the article:

“It's not just what I say on a stage in a debate, and what point I score and whether my opponents attack me, or whatever,” she said. “I try to think responsibly about, OK, when I'm president and I actually want to do this, how am I going to do it, and how am I going to avoid having said something during the campaign that will come back and undermine what I think my responsibility is, which is actually to get something done.”

She would apparently not want to be constrained in what she will do based on what she has said she will do. And, of course, we are supposed to cast our votes for her to "get something done," when we are not told in advance what that something will be.

The Debate, Some Reactions and Some Links

It was fascinating to have a ringside seat at last night's debate. I got to meet all of the candidates and make some remarks in the pre-program, which was televised only on NECN but not MSNBC. NECN has some clips here, and the New York Times has this interesting transcript analyzer. For local coverage, see the story in The Dartmouth and this image gallery.

The Rockefeller Center ran a focus group, some results of which are reported here. The headline is right--it was hard to see any positive outcome for Senator Obama:

Laughing at the candidates’ skirmishes and one-liners but engaging in serious discourse on the their merits, Dartmouth students identified Illinois Sen. Barack Obama as the biggest loser of Wednesday’s debate — but couldn’t agree on a winner — in a focus group moderated by government professor Ron Shaiko, a senior fellow and associate director of the Rockefeller Center.

Given how much I enjoyed his trip to Dartmouth in May and seeing his campaign's visibility yesterday morning (to say nothing of the generally favorable things I've written about him), I was astonished to find myself wondering during the event whether he was still campaigning for the top spot. I initially thought that he was suffering from simply less airtime than in previous events, but the Dodd-clock shows that he still got as much as anyone but Senator Clinton.

In general, I think that Senator Biden and Congressman Kucinich did the best for themselves, but Senator Clinton simply won by not losing. The greatest irony of the night was Senator Gravel accusing other folks of living in Fantasy Land. That's rich. My biggest lesson of the day was that Tim Russert is an extremely talented moderator. With him at the podium, there was no need for gimmicks.

For the best write-up I've read, see this piece by Reid Wilson at Real Clear Politics, my first interview in the Spin Room.

Democratic Candidates Debate at Dartmouth Tonight

Tonight, the Rockefeller Center and its partners on campus will host a nationally televised debate among the Democratic candidates for President. It airs live tonight on MSNBC.

Chuck Todd, Mark Murray, Domenico Montanaro, and Julia Steers of MSNBC have posted their "First Read." They note:

A brand-new CNN/WMUR poll finds her [Senator Clinton] with a 23-point lead over Obama in New Hampshire (43%-20%). Back in July, her lead was nine points (36%-27%). With that kind of advantage, and with about three months until the early nominating contests begin, doesn’t each debate become more and more important for the candidates chasing her?

You wouldn't know about that lead in the polls from the early morning visibility around Hanover. Dropping off our son at kindergarten this morning, it was all Obama, all the time, with all four corners of the intersection at Wheelock and Park Streets boasting Obama supporters. I think the chase is on--we'll know more this evening.

Dynamic Scoring in Unusual Places

It may not yet be a staple of federal budget policy, but dynamic scoring has come to the New Hampshire/Massachusetts border. From Friday's Associated Press:

The long-planned expansion of Interstate 93 has been pushed a little further down the road. A federal judge ruled yesterday that before they can move ahead with the project, state and federal highway officials must do more work to study the population growth that would be spurred by the widening itself.

The ruling was a victory for environmentalists who argue that widening the road to four lanes between Manchester and the Massachusetts border would itself cause population growth that will lessen the usefulness of the widening, congest secondary roads and cause air pollution.

Of course, it is only a partial equilibrium analysis. Where does the additional population come from? Does their relocating to southern New Hampshire alleviate traffic problems elsewhere, and should that benefit be considered as well?

On the substance of the case, the Conservation Law Foundation is arguing that the resolution of the traffic problems ought to include commuter rail options. I'm sympathetic to the point. It has always been a bit of a surprise that there is no rail link between Boston and Concord, New Hampshire, given the proximity and the number of commuters who now go by car.

Money Magazine Best Places to Live

Reasonable conclusion, wrong methodology.

Particularly bad, if the analysis in the latter is correct, is that the picture shown in the former lies outside of the area used in the rankings.

The Natural State Wins Two Debates

From my vantage point, it looked like Arkansas was the big winner in the two presidential primary debates at Saint Anselm College this week.

Among the Democrats, Senator Clinton took control of much of the affair--refusing to answer inane questions is very presidential, particularly when all of your rivals fall in line behind you. As well, every time she asserted that the group was in agreement, she made it tougher for the others to gain ground on her. Very shrewd, very ... Clintonian.

Among the Republicans, it was harder to sort out who won and who lost. My libertarian leanings make me predisposed to like Congressman Paul, but he didn't come across as composed as he did in the prior debate and he suffered from a very bizarre side camera angle at times. My conservative leanings make me predisposed to like someone other than Rudy McRomney, who all fail the ideological test for various reasons. It's pretty clear that person is Governor Huckabee. It doesn't hurt that his book, From Hope to Higher Ground,is very well written, and that he actually has a solid record of achievement as the governor of Arkansas. (For more on this idea, see this earlier post.) He visited the Rockefeller Center on Sunday evening, and he absolutely charmed the 75 or so people who attended the event.

And the Governor did very well in the debate. If you don't believe me, take a look at these real-time evaluations by a focus group of debate-watchers over at MessageJury.

And So It Begins Again, Again

Recently, I blogged about the early beginning to the 2008 election season here in New Hampshire and, in another post, suggested that my location here reflected the state's ability to provide me with amenities that suit me relatively better than they do other folks, who choose to live elsewhere.

If Moveon.org is going to run this ad in New Hampshire during primetime a full year before the New Hampshire primary, then maybe I blogged too soon.

Of Crowds and Cold

Today was the first really cold day of the season in Hanover. It's 6 degrees Farenheit outside, even at midday. I confess I carpooled with the rest of the Voxfamily for a short ride to work this morning. And the recent bout of freezing rain made the 45 minutes with the snowblower this week more challenging than usual. But I wouldn't want Hanover without the cold winters.

As much as the cold is uncomfortable, I've got a higher threshold for it than most people I've met. The cold keeps the place uncrowded. And it turns out that I've got a much lower threshold for crowds and congestion than most people I've met. So the rest of the world and I sort ourselves into communities where we each get relatively more of what we like and relatively less of what we don't like. And at important times, the fact that we were not in competition made us both better off. Consider, for example, what the prices we paid for our respective first homes might have been if we were all searching in the same market.

To tell the truth, I might even like it even ... colder.

And So It Begins Again

This news generated some ambivalence when I learned about it this weekend:

WASHINGTON -- New Hampshire's two leading news organizations will partner with CNN to host two presidential debates in April, executives with the three media companies announced Friday.

CNN, WMUR and The New Hampshire Union Leader will hold the back-to-back debates on April 4 and 5, the first such events to be held of the 2008 presidential campaign. CNN's Wolf Blitzer will moderate the debates with questions coming from WMUR's Scott Spradling and Union-Leader's John DiStaso. WMUR's Jennifer Vaughn will be moderating questions from the audience. The debate will be televised live nationally on CNN and throughout New Hampshire on WMUR.

"We are thrilled to provide our viewers with the information to make the most informed decision possible when they are voting in their presidential primaries or caucusing," said CNN/U.S. president Jon Klein.

I'm thrilled, too, in the following way. These organizations have considerable experience and expertise in hosting primary events. They run a good show, so conditional on there being events, I'm glad they are in charge. But I would be just as thrilled (and maybe a bit more) if we could start the big events later in the process. I see two pitfalls of starting so early.

First, one of the things that's so interesting about the New Hampshire primary is how much it depends on retail politics--small venues with each of the candidates away from the intense media spotlight of television. I think the process actually helps develop the candidates for the national stage. It is the best justification for continuing to afford the state such a prominent role in the national process of electing the next President. If we put the candidates on television so soon, we select for the naturally telegenic before letting the process of retail politics do its good work, and we undermine the unique aspect of the New Hampshire primary.

Second, why do we have to spend such a long time on an active campaign for the Presidency? There are about 9 and 19 months between the first week of April 2007 and the 2008 New Hampshire primary and general election, respectively. What would we lose by just waiting until the fall before turning up the media spotlight? Not too much, really. What would we gain? Maybe six months of the media spotlight focused on the people actually governing in Washington.

Pumpkin Blogging

This weekend, we traveled an hour south to Keene, New Hampshire, site of the annual pumpkin festival. Although it only managed 22,153 carved jack-o-lanterns in the same place this year, it was quite a spectacle. And it was quite a showing for a town that had been inundated by floodwaters just two weeks earlier.

Blogsearch Technorati