It's S.C. Primary night - Part 2, the Democrats

10:00 p.m.: Looking ahead: Hillary Clinton, in Nashville, congratulates Obama and looks ahead to Feb. 5, when 22 states vote and caucus for Democrats on Super Tuesday. "Millions and millions of Americans are going to have their voices heard and their votes counted," Clinton said.

There are still questions to be answered - about whether Obama will do better with white voters, as he did in Iowa and N.H, states that are less polarized racially, and about whether S.C. will offer a lasting repudiation of negative politicking.

But Clinton is right, of course. And John Edwards is right. It's a long haul. South Carolina just made it that much more interesting.

9:34 p.m. - Still in: Says John Edwards: "Now the three of us move on to Feb. 5."

9:28 p.m. - The winner: Barack Obama gave a stern, surprising victory speech tonight, alternating between a rousing call for change and some scowls at the Clinton campaign.

Said Obama: "After four great contests, in every corner of this country, we have the most votes, the most delegates and the most diverse coalition of Americans than we've seen in a long, long time."

And: "The kind of change we seek will not come easy. Partly because we have fine candidates in this field, fierce competitors who are worthy of your respect and admiration."

But: "Contentious as this campaign might get, we have to remember that this is a Democratic nomination."

Still, he made his own swipes: "We know that real leadership is about candor and judgment," he said, and "We're up against the idea that it's acceptable to say anything and do anything to win an election."

And finally: "Yes, we can. Yes, we can change. Yes, we can. Yes, we can heal this nation. Yes, we can seize our future."

8:55 p.m. - K.O.: Mark Johnson reports from Columbia:

Former S.C. Gov. Jim Hodges, a key Obama supporter in the state, said the results are a "first-round knockout."

"Barack Obama has answered his critics as to whether he can build a broad coalition, and he did it in a Deep South state," Hodges said, referring to Obama's 24 percent of the white vote in the exit polls. Edwards captured 39 percent and Clinton 36 percent.

Hodges said initial estimates show that more than 500,000 voters may have gone to the polls today, which is more than in last week's Republican primary, even though South Carolina is a solid Republican state in the general election. That speaks well of Obama, Hodges said, and spells trouble for Republicans.

8:46 p.m. - "Like my father": On the N.Y. Times Web site, and in tomorrow's Times, is an endorsement of Barack Obama by Caroline Kennedy. JFK's daughter, in an essay titled "A President Like My Father," says:

"Sometimes it takes a while to recognize that someone has a special ability to get us to believe in ourselves, to tie that belief to our highest ideals and imagine that together we can do great things. In those rare moments, when such a person comes along, we need to put aside our plans and reach for what we know is possible.

We have that kind of opportunity with Senator Obama. It isn’t that the other candidates are not experienced or knowledgeable. But this year, that may not be enough. We need a change in the leadership of this country — just as we did in 1960."

8:30 p.m. - Justice Edwards?: McClatchy's Steven Thomma writes that John Edwards faces a harsh political future:

"Edwards now confronts the all-but-certain fact that he will not be the nominee. He has not won a state, not even his native South Carolina, the only state primary he won in 2004.

His hope now is to find enough cash to stay in the campaign and continue to win some delegates somewhere. That could give him a prized bargaining chip should Obama and Clinton remain locked in such a close contest that each falls short of the delegate majority needed to win the nomination. That might force them into a deal with Edwards to gain his delegates.

His dream: a deadlocked convention turns to him as an alternative. The more likely reality: He delivers his delegates and hopes to be named attorney general or to the Supreme Court. "

8:12 p.m. - No speech (yet): The Hillary Clinton campaign just released this statement:

"I have called Senator Obama to congratulate him and wish him well.

"Thank you to the people of South Carolina who voted today and welcomed me into their homes over the last year. Your stories will stay with me well beyond this campaign and I am grateful for the support so many of you gave to me.

"We now turn our attention to the millions of Americans who will make their voices heard in Florida and the twenty-two states as well as American Samoa who will vote on February 5th.

"In the days ahead, I’ll work to give voice to those who are working harder than ever to be heard. For those who have lost their job or their home or their health care, I will focus on the solutions needed to move this country forward. That’s what this election is about. It’s about our country, our hopes and dreams. Our families and our future."

(Update: One Clinton is making a speech. In Independence, Mo., he congratulated Obama, then said, in a possible effort to dismiss S.C.: "Now we go to Feb. 5, when millions of Americans get in the act."

He also said: "Let us begin with a clear statement: This country needs a change in direction.")

8:10 p.m. - Still hungry: Rob Christensen reports from Edwards headquarters:

Victory is in the eye of the beholder. As the changing CNN projections put former N.C. Sen. John Edwards at 20 percent there were cheers, groans when it down to 19 percent and cheers when it returned to 20 percent.

The atmosphere was so laid back, that Edwards' chief strategist Joe Trippi could afford to dine as the totals were coming in.

"Trippi, party of two. your table is ready" said the PA announcer at Jillian's bar and restaurant, an hour after the polls closed and CNN called the election for Barack Obama.

7:55 p.m. - Remember us?: Florida governor Charlie Crist, a Republican, takes a page from the Scott Boras-Alex Rodriguez book of nosing in on someone else's moment. He's announcing his endorsement of John McCain for the Republican nomination. An important endorsement in a tight Florida race.

7:50 p.m. - Celebration: The Obama folks are buoyant. Understandable, given the numbers in Mark Johnson's latest report from Columbia:

The Obama campaign can't contain their happiness with the first round of exit poll results showing him winning in a blowout with 55 percent to Clinton's 27 and Edwards' 17 percent. What was particularly pleasant for them was that Obama was getting a quarter of the white vote in the exit polls after surveys this week predicting he would get as little as 10 percent.

This followed more than a week of complaints by the Obama camp and neutral figures in the black community that the Clinton campaign was subtly trying to tag Obama as the black candidate and make future, more diverse states, more difficult for him.

David Axelrod, a top Obama adviser, said the apparent results were gratifying because it sends a message about the Clintons' divisive campaign tactics.

"This was a very, very strong repudiation of the tactics used here," Axelrod said. "Divisiveness would rule, the old techniques of slash and burn politics was working -- that was the story line for the past 10 days. The people of South Carolina were resolute that, 'We don't want to go there. This is about the future, not the past.' "

7:40 p.m. - Clinton in 2nd: NBC News and CNN are declaring a second-place finish for Hillary Clinton. Fox follows a few minutes later. Edwards finishes third in his native state.

7:32 p.m. - Chill: S.C. Rep. James Clyburn, as he did earlier this week, said he wants the campaign to move beyond race. He tells CNN's Wolf Blitzer he was encouraged by the exit polls showing Obama doing well among white voters. "Everybody ought to just chill, put this stuff behind us, and let's talk about the issues, let's talk about the future," he said to Blitzer.

7:28 p.m. - Waiting on second: Rob Christensen of the Raleigh News & Observer checks in from Edwards headquarters:

Dozens of Edwards supporters gathered at Jillian's sports bar in downtown Columbia waiting for the results while eating pizza, burgers and meatballs.

Among them was Charles Worsley, a retired school administrator from Rockville, Maryland, who has been volunteering for Edwards for the last week.

CNN had already projected that Sen Barack Obama would win. But Edwards was battling with Hillary Clinton for second.

"I think he has a chance to come in second place and wouldn't that be doggone great," Worsley said. "This is such a strange election. Maybe its something we haven't seen in 50 years. Maybe it will be a delegate hunt to the convention."

7:15 p.m. - If a candidate won in a forest...: Mark Johnson reports from Obama headquarters: "At the stroke of 7 p.m., when the polls closed, a giant TV screen blaring NBC at Obama's primary night celebration at the Columbia convention center announced Obama well ahead in the exit polls. There were cheers, but only a few, because the crowd of supporters was still outside waiting to go through security screening. The only folks in the house were the snarly press corps and a marching band. (Don't ask how the Sousaphone got throught the metal detector.)

7:02 p.m. - The race vote: Exit polls are showing Obama with about a quarter of the white vote - a little higher than many expected. CNN exit polls show the white vote as follows: Edwards, 39 %, Clinton, 36%, Obama, 24%. The black vote: Obama 81%, Clinton 17%, Edwards 1%. Fox has similar numbers.

7:00 p.m. - Well, that was quick: CNN, Fox, NBC are declaring Barack Obama as the winner of the S.C. Primary. Clinton with a slight lead over Edwards.

6:45 p.m. - Exit polls: S.C. election officials are expecting a record turnout today. The Associated Press is reporting some results from its exit polls of Democratic Primary voters. As expected, about half the voters were black. The AP hasn’t yet broken down how blacks and whites voted.

Some highlights of the exit polls:

Change: As in New Hampshire, three in four Barack Obama voters said the most important quality in a candidate is that he can bring about needed change. Four in 10 Hillary Rodham Clinton voters said their priority was that a candidate has the right experience while nearly three in 10 picked change. As usual, John Edwards scored highest on empathy – at least half his voters said it was most important that the candidate "cares about people like me." Few voters said the candidate’s electability was their top priority.

Issues: Asked whether their candidate’s positions on issues or leadership and personal qualities were more important to their vote, only six in 10 said issues.

Milestone candidacies: Three in four voters said the country is ready to elect a black president and about as many said that about a woman. Somewhat more Clinton voters said the country is not ready to elect a black than Obama voters said the country wasn’t ready to elect a female president.

Negativity: After the contentious Democratic debate Monday night, three in four Obama voters said Clinton had attacked Obama unfairly and slightly fewer than half accused their own candidate of attacking Clinton unfairly. Two-thirds of Clinton voters said Obama attacked her unfairly and nearly as many said she attacked him unfairly. Edwards voters were more likely than either of the other candidates’ supporters to say both Clinton and Obama attacked each other unfairly.

6:30 p.m. - Counting down: Greetings from the Observer’s live blog of the S.C. Democratic Primary vote. The polls are closing in 30 minutes. We have reporters with candidates in the Palmetto State, but our first news of the night is that those candidates don’t include Hillary Clinton, who is in Nashville. You have permission to strongly consider that the first concession of the evening.

Once the polls close, you can be sure the next few television hours will be spent discussing exactly what constitutes a South Carolina victory. Polls leading up to today show Barack Obama with leads ranging from eight to 20 points, although polls three weeks ago showed similar double-digit leads for Obama before he lost New Hampshire.

So what’s a win for each candidate?

For John Edwards, it might be second place. He's been gaining steadily on Clinton this week - perhaps as a result of his Southern Roots pitch resonating with the hometown crowd, or perhaps because voters are put off with Hillary for ignoring them and/or getting ugly with Obama.

Whatever the reason, a second-place finish either helps Edwards’ case that the Big Two is actually the Big Three, or the victory is dismissed as nothing more than a nod to the native son.

For Clinton, second place is a victory if it's close - perhaps five percentage points or fewer. Don’t be surprised if her camp spins furiously that a narrow Obama win, fueled by the uncommonly large black vote in S.C., is a misleading victory. If Obama does poorly with S.C. whites, as polls suggest he is, Clinton supporters will note that the uniter sure didn't do a very good job of uniting, a weakness the Democrats can't afford in November.

The Obama camp, of course, will say that a win is a win is a win. (Quick quiz: What was the margin of victory in Iowa? N.H.? Exactly...) A 15-point victory would be lovely to Obama supporters, but any win is an opportunity to stand tonight atop the pile of negative ads and ugly politics, to pull out some variation of the black/white/red/blue/purple America speech and remind voters everywhere why they fell in love with him way back in December 2007.

A note: This is the only race being tallied tonight, so results should come in quickly - as they did a week ago in the S.C. Republican primary. Our first declaration of a winner last week came at 9:15 p.m. - and that was with a three-point margin of victory.

More soon...

We have a winner...

So says a confident Dean Debnam, President of Raleigh's Public Policy Polling, which released its latest S.C. Democratic primary poll this afternoon. The poll has Obama leading Hillary Clinton by 20 points - 44-24 percent - the largest margin of any poll we've seen this week.

Says Debnam, in a statement accompanying the poll's release: "Barack Obama is clearly going to win the South Carolina primary."

In a phone conversation a few moments ago, he wasn't backing off: "I don't see anybody closing that gap in two days. "

The PPP numbers, from 595 likely Democratic voters called last night: Obama 44 %, Clinton 24%, Edwards 19% - with 14% undecided. The poll has a margin of error of +/- 4 percentage points.

Perhaps some of you remember a little state called New Hampshire, where Obama had double-digits leads in several polls leading up to the Jan. 8 primary, only to lose. Debman remembers, too.

"I was a little gun shy after New Hampshire," he says. "That's why I polled twice this week."

What he found was Obama's base of black voters has remained solid, and his total was unchanged this week at 44 percent. Clinton, however, dropped four points in the last two days, and Edwards rose four. Those votes, Debnam says, are white voters migrating to Edwards.

That migration could continue tomorrow, especially if undecided white voters go Edwards way. "I think what you might see is that Clinton made a big mistake leaving the state," Debnam says. "She could finish third, and that would be a disaster for her."

The news isn't all good for Obama, who was favored by only 18 percent of S.C. whites. "He's not a viable candidate without that vote," Debnam says.

But tomorrow? Other polls this week have Obama with leads as little as eight points. Debnam is unwavering.

"Even if Clinton were to get all the undecideds, Obama is still ahead," he says. "He is going to win."

Is S.C. fickle - or merely undecided?

Clemson professor Joseph Stewart is a political scholar, author of four books, and observer of elections in the South for three decades.

He also is a patient man – gracefully taking phone calls all hours of the day for the past month from media wanting him to dissect the South Carolina primaries. It’s what academics do every four years in primary states. "I live with the assurance that by noon on Sunday, at the latest, no one will care what I think," he says.

But we do, at least one more time:

Primary Source: A month ago, polls had Mike Huckabee leading comfortably in Republican polls in South Carolina, with Hillary Clinton leading the Democrats. What do you think happened?

Stewart: I think by frontloading these primaries this early, it’s just hard getting the voters attention. In our last poll, we still had 36 percent of people who hadn’t made up their minds on a candidate. My guess is that people don’t pay attention to politics this far in advance.

If Saturday comes up with something different, I won't be completely surprised.

Primary Source: How much of it is simply New Hampshire and Iowa - voters, as always, being swayed by what other voters think?

Stewart: I think that’s probably the case with (Barack) Obama. After Iowa, he was seen as someone who was more electable, as someone who might have a better chance.

Primary Source: What are you seeing in the last few days?

Stewart: People appear to me to be making some decisions, and it appears that trend is helping Obama and, to a lesser degree, Edwards. If I go with the data, I think that will stick on Saturday.

Primary Source: Some political observers think the S.C. primary results will be diminished because the racial disparity in polls is so great (with blacks favoring Obama and whites favoring Clinton and Edwards).

Stewart: I don’t think it should be diminished. It answers a question that’s important to all the Democratic candidates: Will the African American community vote as a block? It provides candidates with insights into how they campaign in states with blocks of African American voters.

Also, whoever wins will be able to claim a victory. That’s important.

An Edwards surge in S.C.?

Is John Edwards connecting with S.C. voters with his message of Southern roots?

The latest Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll has Edwards creeping to within four points of Hillary Clinton in the South Carolina Democratic primary.

The numbers:

Barack Obama, 38%
Hillary Clinton, 25%
John Edwards, 21%
Someone else, 5%
Not sure, 7%

Edwards has seen his numbers improve all week in surveys, including the Zogby poll, where he's jumped six points in two days. That bump has come at the expense of Obama, who's 13-point lead in Zogby's poll is a margin that's still larger than most S.C. surveys.

Says Zogby: "More evidence that the race is tightening down the stretch: Thursday’s polling alone had Obama leading with 36%, but Clinton was just five points back at 31% (a good day for her). Edwards came in with 19% yesterday alone. The one-day sample was not enough to draw sweeping conclusions, but it is an indicator that this race continues to change."

Morning Buzz: Endorsements rolling in - do you care?

Welcome to the day before the S.C. Democratic primary. We'll bring you the news from the campaigns today, along with Clemson political scientist and Southern politics scholar Joseph Stewart, who will help sort out what's happened in his state the last few weeks.

Among the bigger stories last night was the New York Times endorsing Hillary Clinton and John McCain to represent the Democratic and Republican parties in November. On Tuesday, S.C.'s largest newspaper, The State, endorsed Barack Obama after earlier endorsing McCain.

Our question of the day: Do you care?

Newspaper endorsements once had a keener influence in national elections, but that impact has waned in the swirl of voices now available to voters. More newspapers don't even bother with practice (although the Los Angeles Times announced earlier this month that it was giving the nod to presidential candidates this year for the first time since 1972.) The Observer will endorse for the N.C. primaries and general election.

The idea behind such endorsements is not to tell readers how to mark their ballot, but to follow through on a year-round editorial page mission of advocating for what it thinks is right. That's a complex thing in elections, of course - no candidate comes without plenty of flaws. But endorsements are a way of navigating through the choices; in this era of spot, superficial analysis, they are often a thoughtful and thorough aide for voters.

Of course, anyone can play. Each campaign season is filled with endorsements - from unions to U.S. congressmen to any local figure with an opinion and a healthy self-esteem.

Do you pay attention? How do you use endorsements, if at all, when choosing your candidate? Post a comment.

The Buzz:

The Observer's Tommy Tomlinson says up close, Hillary shows a different kind of experience.

Mary C. Curtis says that Barack Obama is still staying on message.

The latest McClatchy/MSNBC poll shows an eight-point Obama lead in S.C. - and a significant racial divide.

In S.C., John Edwards doesn't talk so much about corporate greed. It's all Southern roots, says the News & Observer's Rob Christensen.

Obama went on the David Letterman Show last night. Here's his Top 10.

Here are the New York Times endorsements of Clinton and McCain. Why make those endorsements before the S.C. primary? Politico explores.

In Florida, the Republicans were not nearly as feisty in their debate last night.

The Los Angeles Times explores Rudy Giuliani's mixed record of private ventures.

With Rudy fading and Mike Huckabee broke, Florida looks like a springboard for McCain or Mitt Romney, the Boston Globe reports.

Not that we're covering the election like a horse race. Then again, Slate's Jack Shafer asks: Why is that such a bad thing?

The "other spouse" speaks out

In an e-mail to Barack Obama supporters today, Michelle Obama said her husband doesn't have nearly as famous a spouse working for him as Hillary Clinton does. She also said: "We didn't expect misleading accusations that willfully distort Barack's record."

The Observer's Mark Johnson was in Cheraw today, where Michelle Obama spoke to a crowd of supporters at a Baptist church.

Primary Source: Was Michelle Obama as pointed about the Clintons at the rally as she was in e-mail?

Johnson: Throughout the campaign, Michelle has been more blunt than her husband. That's partly because she's not the candidate and has more latitude. She doesn't have to play stateswoman and judiciously spell out issues, so she can speak from the gut. Another factor is that this is a woman who, though a Harvard-trained lawyer, grew up on the gritty southside of Chicago. Being tough comes naturally. That's a long way of saying that the email is not a surprise, and I'll write more about her for Saturday's paper. (Sorry, had to put in a plug.)

She did not take on the Clintons during this morning's gathering, other than when she said the narrow definition of "experience" for the presidency "cuts most of us out who haven't been privileged to live in the White House or inherit a company or be a CEO."

I had a brief interview with her afterward and tried to draw her out on the Clintons, but she passed on the opportunity, just saying she was focused on her husband's efforts. At this point, they don't need to highlight the Clinton's tactics too much, as the news media has been hitting that topic pretty hard.

Primary Source: How does this less-famous spouse do connecting with voters?

Johnson: This was a predominantly black crowd and she established an immediate rapport, but not just based on the common experience of race. She delivered a 45-minute stump speech, and there wasn't a drooping eyelid in the room, talking about her children, growing up working class in Chicago, the strains of a working mom - tying it all in to economic issues that she pledged her husband would address.

She could easily joke with the crowd, mentioning how we all have relatives "who put plastic on the furniture," which underscored her point about people who worked hard and wanted to protect the things they were finally able to buy. A few parts of the speech were aimed at a black crowd but 98 percent of it could have been delivered anywhere to any type of crowd.

Primary Source: You wrote in the Observer today about the perception today that Obama needs more than a simple S.C. victory, in part because Hillary has spent most of the week elsewhere. What does the Obama camp think about that perception?

Johnson: They're a little frustrated that the storyline is getting out that Clinton is skipping the state, because it's only partly true. Clinton was gone for a couple days, while Obama and Edwards hit the trail at full speed. But her campaign is pumping tons of money into advertising, and they have deployed former President Clinton to campaign and to attack Obama.

It's a tactic by the Clintons to appear that they have given up, in hopes that will be the story line if she loses. In reality, they're still pumping in resources to tamp down Obama's potential margin of victory and, as we pointed out in this morning's paper, to make his victory more dependant on the black vote - an effort to marginalize him in other states with more diverse populations.

Primary Source: You've spent time talking to voters in New Hampshire and South Carolina in the past month. That's a wide diversity in voters. What have they taught you?

Johnson: The story I helped write for today's paper reinforced a real important lesson for reporters about the importance of talking to lots of people of different races, occupations, ideology, etc. I kept hearing from Obama supporters, and some undecided folks, that the Clintons were trying to portray Obama as the black candidate, sacrificing a loss in South Carolina with its substantial black population so that Obama would be hurt in other states.

One of the pieces of evidence was Bill Clinton's criticism of Obama's comments about his own record on the Iraq War. Clinton used the phrase "fairy tale." White supporters of Obama couldn't really articulate the insult of those words and, frankly, I didn't see the problem. Black voters and supporters of Obama, however, emphasized that for blacks, who are told throughout their lives by obstacles in society and even by their own community that they can't do certain things, the "fairy tale" phrase was another way of saying Obama couldn't be president because he's black.

Fired up! The S.C. woman behind a campaign chant

The National Journal tells a delightful story of the S.C. woman behind the Obama campaign's favorite rally cry. (Our Mary C. Curtis was in Greenwood to see her in action.) We especially like how the woman, Edith Childs, is not too smitten to correct Obama on the details of her/his story.

Says the report:

GREENWOOD, S.C. -- The "little woman" from Greenwood who inspired Barack Obama to use "Fired Up! Ready to Go!" as his central campaign chant has been part mystery, part myth since the candidate started telling her story four or five times a day on the stump.

But yesterday, "the little woman," Councilwoman Edith Childs, made an in-the-flesh appearance with her favorite presidential candidate. Dressed in a purple suit with her trademark hat, "a church hat" as Obama often refers to it, Childs joined Obama on stage at a town hall here to lead the crowd in her own rendition of "Fired Up! Ready to Go!"

"Fired Up! Ready to Go! Fired Up! Ready to Go!" Childs chanted in a singsong. (Obama's delivery usually has a little more punch.) Childs added a twist to her call this time, getting the crowd to repeat after her, "Obama! Obama! Obama!" and "Will be! Will be! Will be!" followed by "Our next! Our next! Our next!" and finally "Pres-ah-dent! Pres-ah-dent! Pres-ah-dent!"

Obama doubled over with laughter as Childs led the crowd in the chant and hugged her after she finished.

Childs later held court with reporters, and she corrected some facts about Obama's trail tale of the day the chant was born. There were 38 people who showed up to hear him speak that day, not twenty as he likes to tell it. He was annoyed, Childs said, rather than bewildered when he first heard her chanting slowly and the assembled crowd began to join in. And she joked that he doesn't get her age right; Childs is 59 and not in her sixties as Obama always says.

She also said that she thinks Obama will win S.C. in a "landslide" Saturday and that Bill Clinton is crossing the line with his attacks. And she has only one request for Obama should he win the presidency.

"I want an invitation to an inaugural ball!" Childs said, looking straight into the TV cameras.

Voting confusion in Florida

No, not that kind. Three new Florida Republican polls show three different groupings at the top.

Miami Herald/St. Petersburg Times:

John McCain, 25%
Mitt Romney, 23%
Rudy Giuliani, 15%
Mike Huckabee, 15%

Public Policy Polling:

Mitt Romney, 28%
John McCain, 25%
Rudy Giuliani, 19%
Mike Huckabee, 15%

Strategic Vision:

John McCain, 25%
Rudy Giuliani, 22%
Mitt Romney, 20%
Mike Huckabee, 18%

Each polls shows a significant number of voters who are undecided on a candidate or not entirely firm with their choices, making tonight's nationally televised debate (9 p.m., MSNBC) potentially critical for the candidates.

Two Republican notes:

The Miami Herald polled showed no clear frontrunner for voters who considered themselves conservatives, with McCain and Romney each getting about a fifth of the nods.

While McCain had a slight lead over Romney among voters who were concerned most with the economy or war, Romney had a 50-14 lead over McCain among voters most concerned about illegal immigration.

Also, in South Carolina, four new polls show Obama maintaining leads from nine to 17 points. A Zogby daily tracking poll shows Obama's lead over Clinton tightening from 43-25 to 39-24, with Clinton's lead over John Edwards narrowing to five points.

Said pollster John Zogby:

Edwards, meanwhile, has had his second good day since the Monday night CNN debate, in which he delivered a strong performance. He hit 19% support on Tuesday alone and then 27% support on Wednesday alone. And, on Wednesday alone, he pulled ahead of Clinton overall. He has pulled ahead among whites. Could he pull ahead of Clinton and finish in second place?

Heads up: A new McClatchy/MSNBC poll from South Carolina will arrive late this afternoon.

Morning Buzz - Will you shun the "other" candidate?

It is one ad, one negative political ad among dozens this primary season.

It's running on S.C. radio this week, placed there by the Hillary Clinton campaign. In it is a recording of a Barack Obama remark last week: "The Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there over the last 10, 15 years."

That sentiment, by itself, is a fingernail on the chalkboard to S.C. Democrats. The Obama campaign says the words are taken harshly out of context. Nonpartisan factchecking organizations have sided with Obama, declared the ad a blatant distortion.

Yet the Clinton camp keeps running it. The Obama camp is furious. And now, this one ad - perhaps more than any other - has crystalized a Democratic Party concern that recent Clinton aggressiveness is doing damage to more than the Illinois senator. The worry: Attacks from both Clintons - and return volleys from Obama - might cause supporters of the Democratic runner-up to sit at home in November or find appeal in John McCain, a centrist who also happens to be a likable guy.

Our question for you: Will the attacks on your candidate - or the tone of the campaign - cause such distaste that you won't vote for your party's nominee?

The Buzz:

The Observer's Mark Johnson and Taylor Bright report that Obama might need more than a simple victory in South Carolina.

The Observer's David Ingram provides a helpful breakdown of each charge the Clinton campaign has leveled at Obama.

James T. Hammond of The State reports that the question with young S.C. voters-to-be is a familiar one - will they show up?

Michelle Obama offers a fierce defense of her husband, the Greenville News reports.

Time for Hillary to send Bill home, says the New York Times Gail Collins.

Politico says there's lots of material Obama could use to fight back against both Clintons, but so far he's resisting.

John Kerry knows about being on the bad end of a negative ad. He speaks up for Obama.

Have you heard John Edwards' father was a millworker? The Greenville News tells more of the story.

The Republicans are no longer in S.C., of course, but they are debating tonight on national TV, the South Florida Sun-Sentinel reports.

In the small circle of Republican candidates, Mitt Romney is liked least, says Michael Luo of the New York Times.

Democrats are worried that the latest Clinton attack ad might do more than damage Obama.

Heard the one about the candidate running for president? Adam C. Smith of the St. Petersburg Times reports on the best jokesters in Election 2008.

The evangelical vote - what we're missing

Are secular and political America getting it wrong about evangelicals?

Author Jim Wallis, leading a panel on faith and politics today, told a George Washington University audience that the evangelical movement is maturing, awakening to new issues including poverty, immigration and the environment. These new evangelicals are ready to influence political thought in profound ways, he said, but the media seem largely unaware of the change.

Wallis, founder and CEO of the Christian organization Sojourners, is also the author of The Great Awakening: Reviving Faith & Politics in a Post-Religious Right America, released this week.

Before the conference, he answered a few of our questions.

Primary Source: What are the media missing about evangelicals?

Wallis: The media pundits say South Carolina is full of evangelicals, but they have absolutely no clue about what that means. For example, the exit polls in the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary have asked departing Republican voters if they are "evangelicals," but they don't ask the same question of exiting Democrats—therefore assuming there aren't any evangelicals voting for Democrats, an assumption that is demonstrably not true.

The leading Democrats in the race—Obama, Clinton, and Edwards—speak explicitly and articulately as Christians and their campaigns have reached out as much to faith communities as the Republicans have.

Primary Source: How has the evangelical movement matured? How has it broadened its agenda?

Wallis: The agenda of the faith community has undergone a significant shift—especially for a new generation of Evangelicals. Abortion and gay marriage are not the only overriding "moral issues" for many now, though the sanctity of life (more consistently applied) and healthy families (without scapegoats) are still critical concerns.

But now other key moral issues have taken on great importance in the faith agenda. These issues include both global and domestic poverty, pandemic diseases like HIV/AIDS which ravage the developing world, human trafficking and the extreme violations of human rights in places like Darfur, the alarming threats of climate change and the imperatives of "creation care" for the environment, the need for a more ethical response to the genuine threats of terrorism and a foreign policy more consistent with our best moral values.

Primary Source: What role do you think evangelicals will have politically, here and elsewhere?

Wallis: Two things in particular have changed. First, we now see the “leveling of the praying field” as many Democrats are rediscovering their own reli­gious roots, with many coming out of the closet as people of faith. And their candidates are actively reaching out to the faith community. Perceived in recent years as the “secular party,” hostile to religion and values, Democrats are becoming a much more faith-friendly party—that’s a real sea change.

Second, and more important, the agenda of the faith community—especially the evangelical community—is changing dramatically. But change must go deeper than politics. In fact, unless change goes deeper, politics won't really change. No matter which candidate finally wins this presidential election, he or she will not be able to really change the big things in the U.S. and the world that must be changed, unless and until there are social movements pushing for those changes from outside of politics.

Because when politics fails to resolve or even address the most significant moral issues, what often occurs is that social movements rise up to change politics; and the best social movements always have spiritual foundations. Evangelicals in America history understood that – the Great Awakenings in our past were always linked to social movements for change.

Clinton on Obama's mind in Rock Hill

Hillary Clinton certainly has changed the way Barack Obama is campaigning. Obama, who in the past rarely used Clinton's name on the campaign trail, spent some quality time on her during a rally today in Rock Hill.

The Observer's Taylor Bright reports that Obama responded to the Clinton campaign's aggressiveness with Obama's voting record - as well as references to his drug use as a teen.

Says Bright:

Obama joked at Winthrop University that, "I know people have been looking through my kindergarten papers."

Obama was harshest on Clinton on trade.

"You can’t always tell what Sen. Clinton’s position on trade has been," Obama said.

He continued: "Sen. Clinton has said we need a timeout on trade. A timeout on trade. Nobody knows when that timeout will end - maybe after the election," Obama said.

Though those may have been his roughest words, he was mild in his criticism overall of Clinton and chose several times to refer to the Clinton and Edwards campaigns as his "opponents."

"This is the kind of politics we can’t afford right now," he said. "We can’t afford to have a politics in which people are not clear about how they stand and where we’re going to take the country. I’ve been very clear," he said.

The biggest cheer from the crowd though was when Obama called out the name of the Democrats’ bogeyman.

"They know whatever else happens the name George W. Bush will not be on the ballot," he said to deafening applause.

Where's Hillary? Not in S.C.

(Updated: 2:41 p.m.)

Hillary Clinton hasn't exactly conceded South Carolina to Barack Obama – having a popular ex-president as your designated Palmetto campaigner seems to be working out OK – but she is clearly focusing her attention elsewhere.

While Obama tries to build on a nearly 20-point lead in the Palmetto state, according to the latest Reuters/Zogby/C-SPAN poll, Clinton is campaigning today in Pennsylvania and New Jersey, the latter being one of 22 states holding a Feb. 5 Democratic primary or caucus. Yesterday, she was in California, another Super Tuesday state.

Like Obama, John Edwards has a day of S.C. events. He continues to tell reporters and everyone else that he’s in it for the "long haul," and that no one really knows what the delegate count will look like come summertime.

(Update: Edwards criticized Clinton today for leaving South Carolina. "After the debate she flew out and won’t be back," Edwards told a crowd of about 150 people in Bennettsville. "What are the chances she’s coming back when she’s president of the United States?")

Now, freed from expectations, Edwards has found a playful voice to complement his populist passion, as evidenced again last night on "The David Letterman Show." In his eight minutes on air, a comfortable Edwards managed a few laugh lines.

On Bill O’Reilly: "Most of what he says is crap."
On Oprah-Obama: "You can do for me what Oprah’s done for Barack."

An odd moment: When Letterman asked how he, Clinton and Obama get along, Edwards said, "We can’t stand each other." The audience applauded tentatively.

Finally, Letterman asked for permission to muss up Edwards’ famous hair.

"You want to?" the candidate replied. "Go ahead."

Morning Buzz - Which values guide your vote?

Three days until South Carolina's Democratic primary. Hillary Clinton is nowhere to be seen in the Palmetto State, instead leaving the campaigning here to husband Bill. Barack Obama, who badly needs an S.C. win, makes stops today across the state.

This week, between taking swipes at each other, both Obama and Bill Clinton have discussed faith on the trail. At Monday's debate, Obama talked of being "a proud Christian" and how his party had not reached out to evangelical voters as aggressively as it should.

It's a familiar refrain for Democrats, but today, a group of prominent evangelicals meet in Washington to discuss how the candidates - and the media - have mistakenly ceded evangelical voters to the Republican Party. Evangelicals, they say, are developing a new moral agenda that brings with it new voting priorities.

Our question for you: How does faith guide your vote? What values are most important in your decision? Post a comment.

The Buzz:

The Observer's Jim Morrill reports that Bill Clinton's campaigning against Barack Obama has strained the loyalty of some S.C. blacks.

Raleigh News & Observer reporter Rob Christensen writes that after Monday's debate, John Edwards is buoyant.

Maureen Dowd says the Clinton double-team is seamy.

Hillary did, however, pick up an important Latino endorsement.

What was Hillary talking about at the debate when mentioned Obama and a "slum landlord"? The Chicago Sun-Times recaps.

Not everyone is happy to see a bipartisan effort for an economic stimulus package, the Washington Post reports.

Mike Huckabee, short on cash, is essentially writing off Florida, the New York Times reports.

Other Republicans also have thinning wallets - except for Mitt Romney, the Miami Herald reports.

Fred Thompson's exit is a victory for conventional wisdom, says Slate's John Dickerson.

With all that's troubling us, why the emphasis on a candidate's likability? The Chicago Tribune's Julia Keller asks and explains.

Obama swings back

The challenge for Barack Obama, today and in the weeks ahead, is to answer the aggressiveness of the Clinton campaign without sacrificing his claim as the candidate who is more than a politician.

An excerpt from an Obama speech in Greenville today. Is he succeeding?

In the debate last night, we spent some time talking about the economy. And one of the things I brought up that concerned me was that when Senator Clinton first released her economic stimulus plan, she didn’t think that workers or seniors needed immediate tax relief. She thought it could wait until things got worse. Five days later, the economy didn’t really change, but the politics apparently did, because she changed her plan to look just like mine.

It reminds me of what happened when we started debating the credit card industry’s bankruptcy bill – a bill that would make it much harder for working families to climb out of debt. Believe it or not, Senator Clinton said again last night that even though she voted for the bill, she was glad it didn’t pass. I know you can get away with this in Washington, but most of us know that if you don’t want to see a bill pass, there’s a pretty easy option available – you can vote against it.

And we’ve heard her say the same kind of thing about NAFTA and China trade –agreements that sent millions of American jobs – thousands from this very state
– overseas. Because only in Washington could Senator Clinton say that NAFTA led to economic improvement up until she started running for President. Now she says we need a time-out on trade. No one knows when this time-out will end. Maybe after the election.

UPDATE: Mary C. Curtis reports that Obama was less pointed about the debate this afternoon in an appearance at Lander University in Greenwood, where students squealed at his arrival.

"We had a little debate last night," Obama told the crowd. "I had to talk to Senator Clinton a little bit."

Obama said he wanted to avoid politics-as-usual.

An endorsement - and a new poll - for Obama

Two items of good news for Barack Obama:

S.C.’s largest newspaper, The State, endorsed him today. Said the paper's editorial board:

The restoration of the Clintons to the White House would trigger a new wave of all-out political warfare. That is not all Bill and Hillary’s fault - but it exists, whomever you blame, and cannot be ignored. Hillary Clinton doesn’t pretend that it won’t happen; she simply vows to persevere, in the hope that her side can win. Indeed, the Clintons’ joint career in public life seems oriented toward securing victory and personal vindication.

Sen. Obama’s campaign is an argument for a more unifying style of leadership.

Also, a new S.C. primary poll shows Obama with a 16-point lead on Clinton, thanks to a significant disparity between black and white voters.

The numbers from Raleigh’s Public Policy Polling:

Barack Obama, 44%
Hillary Clinton 28%
John Edwards, 15%
Dennis Kucinich, 1%


The survey, conducted Monday night, showed Obama getting 70 percent of the African American vote in the state, with Clinton at just 15 percent. Women also supported Obama, 45 to 29 percent.

Obama, however, received the support of only 17% of likely white voters; Clinton led that demographic with 43 percent, followed by John Edwards at 30 percent. Blacks are expected to make up about 50 percent of the votes in Saturday’s primary.

Fred Thompson drops out of race.

After a disappointing third-place finish in the South Carolina primary, Fred Thompson is dropping out of the race for the Republican nomination, the Associated Press is reporting.

In a statement, Thompson said: "Today, I have withdrawn my candidacy for president of the United States. I hope that my country and my party have benefited from our having made this effort."

Thompson did not say whether he would endorse any of his former rivals. He was one of a handful of members of Congress who supported Arizona Sen. John McCain in 2000 in his unsuccessful race against George W. Bush for the party nomination.

Thompson has long been a close friend of McCain, but his departure also might benefit Mike Huckabee, who battled Thompson for the conservative vote in South Carolina.

Thompson was plagued by lackluster fundraising; high-profile staff departures, including some prompted by the deep involvement in the campaign of his wife, Jeri, and less-than-stellar performances on the stump. Thompson also endured repeated questions about his career as a lobbyist and his thin Senate record.

Thompson formally announced his bid in early September, but hit a rocky patch from the get-go. His easygoing style and reputation for laziness translated into a light campaign schedule that raised questions about whether he wanted to be president badly enough to fight for it. A spate of inartful answers to campaign-trail questions – on everything from the Terri Schiavo case to Osama bin Laden – didn’t help matters.

In case you thought they were ready to be nice...

The morning after is feeling like the night before for the Democratic candidates, as an emboldened Hillary Clinton jabbed harder at Barack Obama today, while Obama continued to fret about running against two pointed Clintons.

Said Hillary at a D.C. news conference this morning: "I think what we saw last night was that he’s very frustrated – Senator Obama is very frustrated. The events of the last 10 or so days, particularly the outcomes in New Hampshire and Nevada, have apparently convinced him to adopt a different strategy."

The Clinton campaign also emailed another news release disguised as a "memo" this morning that hammered Obama on the same topics Clinton did at the debate – including how he would pay for his program proposals, plus questions about the more than 120 "present" votes that Obama said were part of a legislative strategy in the Illinois State Senate.

The Clinton campaign is clearly relishing the difficult choices the attacks force upon Obama, who is searching for the seam between claiming the high road and defending himself vigorously.

On the Tony Gee radio show this morning, Obama went with the defensive posture.

"Well you know look, you know, the problem that we’ve got is that we're running not just against Senator Clinton but also a former President, who gets coverage any time he wants," he said, according to ABC News. "You know there’s no other figures really that are comparable to Bill Clinton. You know, this is a unique situation where you’ve got a former President who is actively campaigning. And it is important for us to stay focused on the issues. But it’s also important for me not to just to allow folks to completely make up stuff about my record."

Morning Buzz - an informative or shameful debate?

CNN political analyst Bill Schneider, during the Democratic debate:

"This heated back and forth is benefiting neither Barack Obama nor Hillary Clinton. It's exactly what turns off voters..."

Not here.

Last night's Democratic debate was more informative than shameful, more revealing than revolting. You want to learn about a person, a candidate? Watch what happens when a debate becomes an argument.

If I'm a Democratic voter, I want to see the scripts fall to the floor. I want my candidate popped in the nose, and I want my candidate bloodied, because I want to know what comes next. Does my candidate equivocate or distort when smacked? Does my candidate come back hard, or with a bigger picture, or both?

And the issues? They didn't get lost. We learned plenty about health care and economic stimulus and, once again, that the differences between the Democratic candidates will seem minimal the day after the nominations - when the Republicans are waiting.

But last night also was about a different kind of revelation. We saw Obama's backbone, and Clinton motioning for more, and Edwards' funny indignation. We saw the candidates get ugly, steely, witty, defensive, human. A truly great debate.

Agree or disagree? Post a comment.

Your morning buzz:

The Observer's Mary C. Curtis wonders what Martin Luther King Jr. would have told the bickering candidates.

A sampling of news stories on the brawl - the Washington Post, Chicago Tribune, and the Los Angeles Times.

Brian Stelter of the New York Times says that for better or worse, it was Wolf Blitzer's leniency that let the debate get rancorous. Wolf says his decision was strategic.

The racial dynamic has made even small moments tense, reports Peter Nicholas of the L.A. Times.

S.C. is showing that the battle for black voters is done, says Jennifer Hunter of the Chicago Sun-Times.

The Washington Post's Eugene Robinson says that, for now, the post-presidential statesman Bill Clinton is gone, in favor of the hard-edged Clinton he remembers.

Politico's Ben Smith says Bill Clinton's jabs are doing what they're supposed to do - resonate with voters.

The New York Times David Brooks says conservatives are not playing follow the leader this year.

McClatchy's David Lightman says all the candidates are pitching tax rebates and tax rebates, but will voters see them as help for the economy or political lollipops?

Passion - a scary thing for Democrats?

The Observer's Mary C. Curtis is in Myrtle Beach to cover tonight's Democratic debate. She's also recorded a commentary for National Public Radio previewing the debate and musing on the double-edged role of passion in the primary process. We caught up with her for a few questions:

Primary Source: You say passion has found its way into the Democratic race. How is that a bad thing for Democrats?

Curtis: Passion is a great thing. It brought a record number of Iowans out of a cold night to caucus. It's involving young people in the race. But in politics as in love, an all-consuming passion can be a scary thing. Supporters of Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama must be willing to give up their first love since both can't be at the head of the Democratic ticket.

Primary Source: For Democrats, does that passion pale next to the antipathy people feel toward George Bush? Even if voters have their heart broken with the party's nomination, won't they be able to pull it together by November?

Curtis: I think that's what the Clinton-Obama truce was all about. Democratic leaders looked into the future and realized they needed to try to heal this rift before November. Democrats have shot themselves in the foot before. They need to keep their coalition intact and their voters happy, or at least not unhappy.

Primary Source: Compare the passion you've seen this year with the affection we saw for Bill Clinton and/or George Bush. Is this an intimate connection with a candidate - or with a concept?

Curtis: The crowd at the Obama-Oprah rally in Columbia came to listen, but seemed overwhelmed with the history and meaning of the event. You couldn't help but feel the emotion of the crowd. In a rally in Greenville, Hillary Clinton was surrounded and returned the warmth. I just saw Mike Huckabee get ovations from a crowd who supported his promise of Christian leadership.

Bill Clinton and George W. Bush always had supporters and other who vilified them. it will be interesting to see if the country can rally behind one leader after November. Or -- with so much at stake -- has passion overtaken us all?

Troubling numbers north and south for Giuliani

A Rasmussen poll released today shows Rudy Giuliani trailing Mitt Romney and John McCain in Florida, the state Giuliani has banked his strategy on. The numbers:

Mitt Romney, 25%
John McCain, 20%
Rudy Giuliani, 19%
Mike Huckabee, 13%
Fred Thompson, 12%
Ron Paul, 5%
Not sure, 6%

Perhaps more troubling for Giuliani is a New York state poll, conducted by WNBC/Marist, that shows likley Republican voters favoring McCain over Giuliani and Romney:

John McCain, 34%
Mitt Romney, 19%
Rudy Giuliani, 19%
Mike Huckabee, 15%
Fred Thompson, 6%
Ron Paul, 2%
Not sure, 5%

The Democratic numbers in New York:

Hillary Rodham Clinton, 48 %
Barack Obama, 32 %
John Edwards, 9 %
Undecided, 7 %

Candidates pay tribute to MLK

Candidates are paying tribute today to Martin Luther King, Jr., today. Democratic candidates Barack Obama, Hillary Clinton and John Edwards participated at an MLK rally at the State House in Columbia. Bill Clinton and Republican candidate Mike Huckabee attended a service at Atlanta's Ebenezer Baptist Church, where King and his father once preached.

Mitt Romney, at an MLK parade in Jacksonville, paid tribute, says the Boston Globe. Said Romney:

“Sometimes you think problems are huge and they’re beyond the scope of anyone’s ability to deal with them, but an individual of passion and courage and faith and character can help change an entire nation, as he did."

Obama, in a speech at Ebenezer yesterday, showed himself worthy of that famous pulpit:

There is a young, twenty-three year old white woman named Ashley Baia who organizes for our campaign in Florence, South Carolina. She’s been working to organize a mostly African-American community since the beginning of this campaign, and the other day she was at a roundtable discussion where everyone went around telling their story and why they were there.

And Ashley said that when she was nine years old, her mother got cancer. And because she had to miss days of work, she was let go and lost her health care. They had to file for bankruptcy, and that’s when Ashley decided that she had to do something to help her mom.

She knew that food was one of their most expensive costs, and so Ashley convinced her mother that what she really liked and really wanted to eat more than anything else was mustard and relish sandwiches. Because that was the cheapest way to eat.

She did this for a year until her mom got better, and she told everyone at the roundtable that the reason she joined our campaign was so that she could help the millions of other children in the country who want and need to help their parents too.

So Ashley finishes her story and then goes around the room and asks everyone else why they’re supporting the campaign. They all have different stories and reasons. Many bring up a specific issue. And finally they come to this elderly black man who’s been sitting there quietly the entire time. And Ashley asks him why he’s there. And he does not bring up a specific issue. He does not say health care or the economy. He does not say education or the war. He does not say that he was there because of Barack Obama. He simply says to everyone in the room, “I am here because of Ashley.”

By itself, that single moment of recognition between that young white girl and that old black man is not enough. It is not enough to give health care to the sick, or jobs to the jobless, or education to our children.

But it is where we begin. It is why the walls in that room began to crack and shake.

And if they can shake in that room, they can shake in Atlanta.

And if they can shake in Atlanta, they can shake in Georgia.

And if they can shake in Georgia, they can shake all across America. And if enough of our voices join together; we can bring those walls tumbling down. The walls of Jericho can finally come tumbling down. That is our hope – but only if we pray together, and work together, and march together.

Brothers and sisters, we cannot walk alone.

In the struggle for peace and justice, we cannot walk alone.

In the struggle for opportunity and equality, we cannot walk alone

In the struggle to heal this nation and repair this world, we cannot walk alone.

So I ask you to walk with me, and march with me, and join your voice with mine, and together we will sing the song that tears down the walls that divide us, and lift up an America that is truly indivisible, with liberty, and justice, for all. May God bless the memory of the great pastor of this church, and may God bless the United States of America.

Morning Buzz - Who's your No. 2?

The whispering began last week - on political blogs, in office conversations:

Is John Edwards angling to be Barack Obama's running mate? Would Obama/Clinton (or Clinton/Obama) be a Democratic dream ticket? How about Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson, whose folksy conservatism would complement Romney's wonky awkwardness?

Sure, it's premature to think about running mates, but this is the point of the election when candidates become non-candidates, and we contemplate who might form alliances, and whether those alliances might lead to spot on the ticket. McCain-Thompson, Clinton-Richardson? See? It's fun. The Washington Post even joined in last week.

Which combination of candidates would make a dream ticket for your party? Or do you have your eyes elsewhere in the search for No. 2? Let us know. Post a comment.

The Morning Buzz:

The Observer's Mark Johnson reports that the candidates are marching in Columbia today and debating in Myrtle Beach tonight.

Mary C. Curtis attended church Sunday in Columbia, where there was no politicking from the pulpit - but the election was still on people's minds.

The Washington Post reports that at Ebenezer Baptist Church in Atlanta, Barack Obama took the pulpit and sounded a familiar theme.

Michael Gordon of the New York Times says that the candidates - Democratic and Republican - have flawed Iraq plans.

The South is changing, says Matt Bai of the New York Times, who asks: Are the Democrats going to ignore it again?

Politco's Jonathan Martin says Florida can make-or-break the GOP candidates. (Wait - haven't we said that about Iowa, N.H. and S.C.?)

The Miami Herald breaks down what each Republican needs to win the state.

What would Ronald Reagan say? Not what some GOP candidates are saying, notes the Boston Globe's Jeff Jacoby.

Slate's John Dickerson explains why Clinton's Nevada win wasn't necessarily good for the party.

The Boston Globe's Peter S. Canellos says Obama's problem is not Clinton, it's not enough substance in his own message.

Newsweek's Allison Samuels says that while Barack Obama steers away from discussions about race, his wife does not.

Paul Starr, via the Washington Post, has a message for Democrats: This presidential election is a toss-up.

It's S.C. Primary Night - Part 1, the GOP

10:15 p.m. - Summing it up: McCain reminds a raucous crowd that for the last 28 years, each candidate who has won the S.C. Republican primary has gone on to win the Republican nomination.

Certainly, with this impressive win, McCain showed an ability to win over conservatives who had previously eluded him. Now, says Observer veteran political writer Jim Morrill, the Republican race might narrow to McCain, Mitt Romney and a shaky Rudy Giuliani, depending on if his Florida strategy works.

And Mike Huckabee? Morrill says tonight showed that the former Arkansas governor hasn't yet expanded his evangelical base. "I think in South Carolina he probably had his best shot."

Next week, the Democrats.

1o:04 p.m. - A raise for the speechwriter: John McCain says, "It took us a while, but what's eight years among friends?"

9:44 p.m. - "Far, far from over.": In a gracious concession speech, Mike Huckabee congratulates John McCain not only for winning, but for running an honorable campaign.

"The two of us that finished at the top ran a campaign with a lot of civility," Huckabee says (an apparent answer to those critical of a push polling campaign by Huckabee supporters.)

Also: "This is not an event. It's a process, and the process is far, far from over."

Observer reporter David Ingram adds:

The floor of the ballroom at the Columbia convention center was half-full when Huckabee spoke from the stage. (It's still raining here.) The supporters who were here were generally enthusiastic, but it would be a stretch to say anything more than that.

Huckabee praised his staff, saying he was outspent by some rivals. He said he did better than anyone could have predicted when the campaign began.

"We're not going to sit around and say, 'What if?'.... We left it all on the field."

9:30 p.m. - Thanks for clarifying: McClatchy's William Douglas reports what the Fred Thompson campaign is saying about his curious speech tonight:

Thompson’s campaign declined to say whether the speech was a concession, a swan song, a stump speech to signal he’s fighting on, or what. "It is what it is," said Rich Galen, a Thompson campaign senior advisor.

Galen wouldn’t say what the former Tennessee senator’s next move is.

"The campaign is still a campaign until it’s not the campaign. There’s no hurry to make a decision, other than your deadline," he said. "I don’t have anything to add – not tonight."

9:18 p.m. - A winner: Associated Press and Fox News declare John McCain the winner in South Carolina.

Update: And NBC news, two minutes later. CNN's Wolf Blitzer asks John King why he hasn't arrived at the party. "We're being cautious at CNN," King says. Less than a minute later, CNN declares.

9:15: p.m. - Confidence: The Observer's Mark Johnson reports from McCain headquarters at The Citadel, where the crowd erupts each time a primary update flashes on the big screen:

"Oh my goodness! It feels good right now," said S.C. Speaker of the House Bobby Harrell told a cheering crowd at McCain’s victory rally about 30 minutes ago.

Supporters, from silver-haired veterans to volunteers barely past voting age, savored the potential victory that would give McCain’s campaign the fuel injection it needed.

"It’s on to Florida!" Harrell said, gearing up for the next primary. "Then it’s on to Super Tuesday!"

Jim and Francie Lockridge, of Aiken, and their 16-year-old daughter, Victoria, drove two-and-a-half hours to enjoy the celebration. Eight years ago Jim and Francie backed McCain, when he looked like a long shot to them.

"It seemed like maybe we were alone," said Jim Lockridge, 58, an industrial hygienist and former Army reservist. Saturday night, at Lockridge’s alma mater, he and his family enjoyed being part of a team on the edge of victory.

Update: Horry County, which experienced voting machine problems earlier today, still hasn't reported results. It's an expected McCain stronghold.

9:08 p.m. - Behind the numbers: Earlier, McClatchy reporter Steven Thomma told us to watch the supplemental numbers. How would John McCain draw among conservatives, and how would Mike Huckabee draw among non-evangelicals?

CBS exit polls give us a glimpse: Among conservative voters polled, McCain got 26 percent, a respectable showing against Huckabee's 33 percent and Mitt Romney's 17 percent. Among non-evangelicals, however, Huckabee only drew 12 percent to McCain's 40 percent.

8:40 p.m. - Still in, Part 2: John Edwards for President campaign manager, former Congressman David Bonior, has released a statement congratulating Hillary Clinton on her win in the Nevada Democratic caucus.

Said Bonior: "The race to the nomination is a marathon and not a sprint, and we're committed to making sure the voices of all the voters in the remaining 47 states are heard. The nomination won't be decided by win-loss records, but by delegates, and we're ready to fight for every delegate."

8:30 p.m. - Not over yet! (and some breaking news): Tommy Tomlinson reports from Huckabee headquarters:

Former S.C. Gov. David Beasley takes the stage at the Huckabee party to say that things look good, despite McCain's lead in early returns.

Beasley says the early returns are mostly from the Lowcountry, where McCain was expected to do well; most precincts in the Upstate, where Huckabee is expected to be strongest, haven't come in yet.

"We might be here awhile," he says to cheers from the crowd. (We should note that this event features a cash bar.)

BREAKING CELEBRITY UPDATE: We are also hearing that Chuck Norris will not be here tonight. It is possible that some evildoer somewhere needed to have his fingers broken. But we are not sure.

8:21 p.m. - Not a long night: The networks are all reporting the race too close to call, and the volatile numbers show why. The McCain lead dwindled to two points, then swelled to eight with 22 percent reporting.

Katon Dawson, chairman of the SC GOP, tells the Observer's Jim Morrill that we won't be having a long night, because there's only one race to count and results will come in quickly.

8:10 p.m.- And now, a brief musical interlude: Observer reporter David Ingram, with the Huckabee campaign, reports:

Two men at Mike Huckabee's primary night party at the Columbia convention center are singing duets of pop songs -- only remade with words about the former Arkansas governor.

Their songs so far include:

- "Huckabee Voter" to the tune of the Rolling Stones' "Honky Tonk Woman"

- "Huck!" to the tune of the Beatles' "Help!"

- And "Mr. Huckabee" to the tune of Simon and Garfunkel's "Mrs. Robinson"

8:06 p.m. - Still in: Fred Thompson tells supporters in Columbia: "You know, it's never been about me. It's never been about you. It's been about our country."

In a speech that sounded perpetually like "I'm leaving the race" would come at the next line, it didn't.

Said Thompson: "We'll always stand strong together."

7:55 p.m. - A casualty and speculative casualty: ABC, CNN reporting that Duncan Hunter is dropping out of the race. CNN's Bill Bennett says Huckabee is finished if loses S.C. by any substantial margin.

Coincidentally: Fred Thompson, who said S.C. was his last stand, set to speak any time.

7:40 p.m. - Watch the numbers: McClatchy national reporter Steven Thomma is in South Carolina, where he just spent two hours doing TV under a very cold tent. He came away most impressed - or not - with S.C. Lt. Gov. Andre Bauer, who was the only person in the immediate vicinity not wearing a jacket.

"By the time he went on the air, I swear his teeth were chattering," Steven says. "I really felt for the guy."

Steven also says as the significant numbers arrive tonight, we should pay close attention to the supplementary numbers from South Carolina.

Specifically, says Steven: "Any sign that the party is starting to coalesce, any sign the two frontrunners (McCain and Huckabee) have cross-appeal. Is Huckabee starting to draw the secular Republicans, which he hasn't? Is McCain starting to draw numbers from conservatives, which he hasn't? I suspect we will not see that."

7:27 p.m. - Record turnout: Sorry - it's Nevada, not South Carolina. The Democratic National Committee just sent this e-mail:

New Numbers:
Enthusiasm gap grows… Dems might TRIPLE Republican turnout in Nevada.
With 88% of precincts reporting, NV Dems report 114,000 caucus-goers.
With 97.8% reporting (1,750 of 1,789 precincts), NV GOP reports 43,366.
Also, are South Carolina independents holding out for next weekend’s Dem
primary? Exit polls show just 19% of voters Independent (in the Republican vote).

7:20 p.m. - First concession?: The New York Times is reporting that Bill Clinton is flying from Nevada not to campaign in S.C., but to Buffalo for the Feb. 5 primary. Is that a sign of Hillary placing less emphasis on the Palmetto State?

7:05 p.m. - First bold prediction: MSNBC and CNN say Mitt Romney and Fred Thompson are fighting for third place in South Carolina.

7:00 p.m. - The other race: Polls are closed, but before we start counting, a nod to Hillary Clinton, who won the Nevada Democratic caucus today. The Observer's Tommy Tomlinson checks in from Columbia:

Here's what people on Hillary's e-mail list got this afternoon... note the giant CONTRIBUTE button at the bottom. (Her home page asks for your e-mail address and has a giant button that says SUBMIT. Which is pretty honest if you think about it.)
-
Dear Friend,


Have you heard? We just won the Democratic caucuses in Nevada. You have done so much to make winning moments like this possible. Thank you!

People across the country are placing their faith in our campaign, especially those hardest hit by the recent downturn in the economy. We can't let them down. We're working together to bring about change, and America is responding to our efforts.

Thanks so much for sharing this remarkable journey with me!

All the best,

6:30 p.m. - Welcome to snowy New Hamp...um, the S.C. Primary!: Greetings from the Observer's live blog of the S.C. Republican Primary vote. The polls are closing in 30 minutes, with results expected to trickle in soon after. We have reporters with candidates in the Palmetto State, and we'll keep you updated with news and fun items until the winner steps back from the victory microphone.

The story of the day thus far is a significant polling malfunction in Horry County, on the coast, where 90 percent of the voting machines were down this morning. Voters were told to come back later in the day; some even wrote their votes down on paper and turned them in old-school-style. By afternoon, 80 percent of the malfunctioning machines were working again.

Then there's the weather. Snow didn't cross the S.C. border until after lunch, giving enthusiastic voters time to sip coffee, grab umbrella, and vote. How many looked at the raindrops outside - and later the snow - and decided that the electoral process could survive without them? Reports so far have turnout merely steady.

Joseph Stewart, political scientist at Clemson, says he expects the weather to most deter the undecideds - and there are lots of them, polls say. The voters most likely to brave the elements? Mike Huckabee's supporters, says Stewart.

One more news item - the Nevada caucus vote, which won't influence the S.C. vote as much as the narrative that follows it. Republican Mitt Romney is in the clubhouse with a convincing Nevada win, his second primary/caucus win in a row, which will soothe the sting of a third- or fourth-place S.C. finish tonight.

Romney's win also makes South Carolina critical for frontrunners McCain and Huckabee; whoever wins joins Romney as a multiple-state victor. Whoever doesn't win faces questions of viability beyond the small maverick states of Iowa and New Hampshire.

And, for the sake of my e-mail inbox, let's note that Ron Paul finished an impressive second in Nevada, edging McCain.

Be back when the polls close. Post a comment anytime or e-mail me.

McCain, Huckabee: sedate, but sincere

News first: Three new S.C. polls – two with John McCain leading and one showing a tie with Mike Huckabee - can be found in The Latest Polls.

Versatile Observer reporter Mark Johnson spent time with Republican frontrunners Mike Huckabee and John McCain today, giving him an interesting perspective as he joins us for a chat:

Primary Source: Compare the two campaigns today in tone and energy.

Johnson: They were both somewhat sedate. (A few McCain staffers tried to start a chant but it fizzled. No one even tried at Huckabee's rally.) To be fair, neither of these guys is a spirited orator, so you wouldn't expect a lot of fire in the crowd. Also, both rallies were in Hilton Head and heavily populated with seniors, and I'll just leave that right there.

Both candidates, though, get high marks from voters for coming across as sincere, though in different ways. Huckabee is the genuinely nice guy who voters feel like they can trust, while McCain is the straight talker who voters feel like they can bank on.

Primary Source: McCain released an S.C. ad today using Huckabee's past compliments to blunt criticisms of McCain by push polls linked to Huckabee. Did McCain devote any of his rally to the Ark. governor?

Johnson: McCain never even made a veiled reference to Huckabee, which is not surprising. Candidates sometimes avoid direct attacks and instead let a surrogate -- or an ad, as in this case -- do the dirty work.

Primary Source: How about Huckabee? Some see as risky his standing with Confederate flag supporters this week. Did he come back to more mainstream issues today?

Johnson: From out here on the coast, it's hard to tell Huckabee's strategy. These are retirees out here, many who moved here from out of state. They tend to be fiscal conservatives, not evangelical voters. So his remarks this morning never touched on faith or values. Whether he did the same in the west, with a more dense evangelical population, I don't know.

The big talk of the day is how tomorrow's forecasted bad weather will affect turnout. Will it keep home older voters, who might be inclined toward McCain? Or will it tamp down evangelical voters, since the worst weather will be in the west? Having been one of those media types who misjudged the final days in New Hampshire, I'm not even going to try and guess.

Huck, Chuck, Ric - and Mary

Our Mary C. Curtis has a question about Republican candidate Mike Huckabee:

So what's with the Mike Huckabee-Chuck Norris connection?

He's been onstage and on You Tube with the candidate. On Thursday, he was at Clemson University in South Carolina.

Huckabee realized many of the students were there to cheer action star Norris and "Woo!" for former wrestler "Nature Boy" Ric Flair. He steered clear of his plans for Constitutional amendments banning abortion and gay marriage, preferring to sit in with the rock band/warm-up act.

Norris told the story of how he tested Huckabee's "moxie" by putting on the gloves and sparring with him. "He took it good; he's a real stand-up guy."

For a second there, I was expecting the three he-men to hold their hands over lit matches.

Norris -- who acknowledged his Internet joke fame -- is raising funds for Huckabee with a barbecue at his Texas ranch on Sunday. He said he'll Web cast it with the help of his wife. "Not bad, huh?" he said, introducing Gina, who may have gotten the loudest cheers of the afternoon.

Are Mitt Romney's fibs catching up to him?

Media are buzzing today about Mitt Romney’s testy encounter yesterday in Nevada with an Associated Press reporter who aggressively – perhaps overly so – questioned a Romney statement about lobbyists not "running" his campaign. (Romney also said: "I don't have lobbyists that are tied to my..." before being interrupted.)

Washington insiders are on Romney's senior staff and registered lobbyists are top advisers, the reporter, Glen Johnson, later wrote. Ron Kaufman, chairman of the Washington-based Dutko Worldwide, regularly sits across the aisle from Romney on his campaign plane and participates in debate strategy sessions, the story said.

See the moment here, courtesy of CBS News.

See Johnson's story here.

Mind you, much of the discussion today is rooted in narcissism – journalists like few things more than discussing how we do our job, and how people often stand in our way.

But a narrative is redeveloping here, and it’s reminiscent of the one that hounded, even crippled, Al Gore’s run for the presidency eight years ago.

Does Mitt Romney have trouble with the truth?

Media professor and former Massachusetts journalist Dan Kennedy offers some other examples of Romney getting caught, including saying his father, George, marched with Martin Luther King, Jr., (which Romney later admitted was untrue). Not mentioned was Mitt wooing the gun vote last year by saying he was a long-time hunter, also not true.

Romney apparently had navigated his way past those incidents - and the fibber label - until yesterday.

Is Mitt’s truthfulness a media-created issue – or legitimate concern for his campaign and voters?

Where's John? In a clever new ad

Some video for lunch:

We admit: John Edwards makes us chuckle with "What about John?" - part of his online strategy to remind voters that there's a third candidate worth thinking about in the Democratic race.




Fred Thompson makes a last-day, full-minute case to South Carolinians:



John McCain uses Mike Huckabee's words in a new S.C. ad to blunt Mike Huckabee's supporters:



Hillary Clinton understands - it's the economy:

Huckabee wants "weapons of mass instruction"

Observer reporter Mark Johnson is with former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee, who held a rally in Hilton Head this morning. We'll be chatting with Mark this afternoon. His report from the rally:

Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee emphasized paycheck issues Friday, following a tumble in the stock market the day before and amid increasing anxiety over the economy.

Huckabee told a crowd of retirees in Hilton Head that the biggest change he wants to make is to restore the hope among voters, who believe they are better off financially than their parents, that their children will be able to say the same thing.

"If there's any one thing we have to change in this country it's that resilience and spirit of optimism," Huckabee said, mixing his remarks with his usual humor and self-deprecation.

He highlighted his support for more balanced trade agreements, less regulation on business and the "fair tax," - a modified flat tax system.

"We say in the South that if you can't fix something with duct tape and WD-40, it can't be fixed," he told the early morning crowd at a retirement community. The existing tax code "can't be fixed."

Evangelical voters proved essential to Huckabee's Iowa caucus win, but in South Carolina he's competing for their votes against former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney and former U.S. Sen. Fred Thompson, of Tennessee. Despite the competition, Huckabee talked little about faith and morals.

He focused on future-oriented themes that ultimately tie back to the economy. He wants health care to focus more on prevention before the onset of chronic diseases and other ailments that cost the health care system so much money late in patient's lives.

On education, Huckabee advocated more technology and innovation in the classroom, saying that students are dropping out partly because, in a technology-driven era, they are just plain bored when put at a desk with a black-and-white book.

He also cautioned that students who learn only the core math, English and science courses have a great database - but no operating system. "They don't know what to do with the information," he said. Classes such as art and music are essential to building a child's creativity, he said, noting that he made those courses routine in Arkansas.

"That's where we're going to solve our future energy problems. That's where we're going to find ways to cure the diseases that plague us today," he said. "By creating a creative class of
people who, through music and art, we discover do 10 points better on their SAT scores in math, learn foreign language better - they learn how to learn. It's what I call weapons of mass instruction."

Morning Buzz - bad cop, good campaigner?

The Morning Buzz is pleased today at the news that your presidential candidate kicks puppies, and our presidential candidate doesn't. The South Carolina primary is living down to its reputation as a home for the ugliest of politics, the Observer's Jim Morrill and Dan Huntley write today. We'll be covering the latest news from the state - where voters decide tomorrow on their favorite Republican - as well as news from across the country.

Our question of the day is also about campaigning. The New York Times Patrick Healy writes today about Bill Clinton, whose famous red-faced edge has been on display with more frequency lately. He's asked voters if they want to "roll the dice" with an Obama presidency, then criticized Obama's campaign narrative as a "fairy tale." He's griped about media coverage of the Democratic race, and this week, he snapped at a Nevada television reporter after a question about a caucus voting dispute.

Is the former president merely being a good campaigner and husband by being the bad cop? Or does this make you think less of him? (Or, for some of you, lesser of him.) Post a comment.

Your Buzz:

The Observer's Mary Curtis says Repubican Mike Huckabee has found his everyman voice.

Huckabee says S.C. should get to decide on the Confederate flag, the Associated Press reports.

Politico's Roger Simon says Fred Thompson is right - he absolutely needs a win in South Carolina.

The Washington Post's Michael Gearson says Thompson might have plenty of morality in his speeches, but does he lack moral seriousness?

Slate's John Dickerson says Mitt Romney is now Mr. Fix-it - and it seems to be working.

Chicago Tribune columnist John Kass says conservatives should think hard before whacking at John McCain.

The Boston Globe looks inside Mitt Romney's verbal dust-up with an Associated Press reporter. Here's the CBS News video of the incident.

Southern blacks are split on Clinton and Obama, says the Times' Shaila Dewan.

Who gets the gambling vote? The Los Angeles Times explores this delicate issue in Las Vegas in this interesting story.

Huckabee pulling even with McCain in S.C.?

Two new polls show the Republican S.C. primary race tightening, with one showing Mike Huckabee pulling even with John McCain.

A Rasmussen poll released today showed McCain and Huckabee each at 24 percent in a survey of 895 likely voters Wednesday, with Mitt Romney at 18 percent and Fred Thompson at 16.

A new McClatchy-MSNBC poll, conducted by Mason-Dixon Polling & Research, showed Huckabee trailing McCain by just two percent, well within the poll’s five-percentage-point margin of error:

John McCain, 27%
Mike Huckabee, 25%
Mitt Romney, 15%
Fred Thompson, 13%
Ron Paul, 8 %
Rudy Giuliani, 5 %
Duncan Hunter, 1%
Undecided, 8%

Three other Republican polls released Thursday had McCain with leads ranging 7-10 points over Huckabee, and all but one poll had Romney leading Thompson for third.

On the Democratic side, the McClatchy-MSNBC poll numbers:

Barack Obama, 40 %
Hillary Clinton, 31%
John Edwards, 13%
Dennis Kucinich, 1%
Undecided, 15%

The poll also underscored S.C.’s racial divide. Obama led among blacks by a better than 2-1 ratio. Clinton led among whites by 2-1.

Three other polls released Thursday had Obama with leads over Clinton ranging from six to 13 points. John Edwards was in third in every poll, but he sagged to single digits - 9 percent - in an American Research Group poll.

Bob Johnson to Barack Obama: "I am truly sorry"

Bob Johnson has apologized to Barack Obama for comments the Charlotte Bobcats owner made Sunday at a Hillary Clinton rally.

In a letter to Obama, Johnson said: "I’m writing to apologize to you and your family personally for the un-called-for comments I made at a recent Clinton event. In my zeal to support Senator Clinton, I made some very inappropriate remarks for which I am truly sorry. I hope that you will accept this apology. Good luck on the campaign trail."

At the Clinton rally, Johnson made what appeared to be a veiled reference to Obama’s drug use as a young man:

"To me, as an African American, I am frankly insulted the Obama campaign would imply that we are so stupid that we would think Hillary and Bill Clinton, who have been deeply and emotionally involved in black issues — when Barack Obama was doing something in the neighborhood; I won't say what he was doing, but he said it in his book — when they have been involved," he said.

Johnson also expressed regret for the remarks today on CNN, but he reiterated his support for Clinton.

Want to hear a push poll?

We've never had the pleasure, but an S.C. voter has chronicled the experience:



Fred Thompson, the target of this push poll, was asked at a West Columbia rally today about the tactic, Peter Smolowitz reports:

"I won't call any names," Thompson said, "Gov. Huckabee says he doesn't know anything about it, so I guess we'll have to take him at his word."

Thompson: Glad the green beans aren't crunchy here

The Observer's Peter Smolowitz reports from a Fred Thompson rally this morning in West Columbia:

-

Thompson mixed Southern charm with political facts Thursday morning, winning supporters in West Columbia.

The former Tennessee senator told the crowd he enjoyed being back in a region where people know how to cook green beans that aren’t crunchy. Then he answered questions from the crowd about issues such as Social Security and the economy, telling them he would skip the sound bites some politicians rely on in favor of the answers needed to solve problems.

"It's all about resisting current political pressure in a political year, and looking down the road," he said.

On Social Security, for example, he proposed individual retirement accounts that would help people save money, rather than rely on a system he said was headed for bankruptcy.

Tragg Pinkham, 46, a small business owner in West Columbia, said he had been weighing whether to vote for Thompson or Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee until this week, when he noticed a "striking difference" in Thompson’s ability to address issues.

"He is really hitting the issues head-on instead of placating us with promises that aren’t fulfillable," Pinkham said.

A questioner asked if Thompson’s "inundating the state" with ads was too little, too late.

"The other guys are inundating; I was just revealing," said Thompson. "Some guys spend millions in S.C., then leave."

Asked Thompson, referring to Mitt Romney: "Is that too early, too late?

"Timing is everything, and nobody knows what the right timing is until election night."

Thompson also was asked about sharing a birthday with Bill Clinton.

"It's gotten to the point where we don't even exchange gifts anymore," joked Thompson. "It might have something to do with that impeachment vote."

Morning Buzz - Who's your stay-at-home candidate?

One Republican is conceding the state (Mitt Romney) and another never got started (Rudy Giuliani), but there's plenty of Republican campaigning still happening today in South Carolina, where John McCain is holding onto his lead in the latest S.C. polls.

McCain, as the Observer's Tommy Tomlinson writes today, is less conservative than Romney and less openly religious than Mike Huckabee. But, as Tommy says: In presidential elections, a lot of "less than" often adds up to enough.

We are, however, in January - when voters can afford to be more picky, given the greater number of choices they have. January is when voters talk big - not only about whom they like, but whom they can't stand in their own party, whom they could never vote for, nope, never.

Our question of the day: Is there a candidate in your party who would cause you to stay at home in November? Tell us who it is, and why. Post your comment.

The Morning Buzz:

The Observer's Jim Morrill reports that the elbows are flying in S.C.

Mary Curtis finds great interest about our primaries - in Ireland.

The State's John O'Connor says the candidates have a message, and another, and another.

Greenville News columnist Dan Hoover details the latest dirty tricks on the campaign, including the Romney family Christmas card.

The Washington Post's Paul Farhi takes a close look at the campaigns' theme songs. Perhaps the candidates should have done the same.

Politico's Josephine Hearn reports that the Democratic race is causing rifts in the Congressional Black Caucus in Washington.

Obama's difficulties with race will not go away, writes Timothy Egan of the New York Times.

The Democrats are trying hard with Latino voters in the west, writes the Los Angeles Times.

In Florida, the GOP is seeking the Jewish vote, writes the Miami Herald.

Rudy Giuliani's supporters back home are getting worried, writes Sam Roberts of the New York Times.

The Associated Press' Charles Babington says the GOP could face its first contested convention in 60 years.

Palmetto Poll: Republican race far from decided

John McCain leads Republicans in the Palmetto Poll, a survey of 450 prospective S.C. voters by Clemson University. But a startling 36 percent of respondents said they hadn't yet made up their mind.

The poll, released this afternoon, was taken Jan. 9-15. Pollsters asked for whom respondents would vote "if the South Carolina primary were held today." The numbers:

John McCain, 29%
Mike Huckabee, 22%
Mitt Romney, 13%
Fred Thompson, 10%
Ron Paul, 6%
Rudy Giuliani, 3%
Undecided, 17%

A further indication of S.C. uncertainty: in a follow-up question, 46 percent said they "might change" their vote.

Mitt: It's over in S.C.

Republican Mitt Romney told reporters Wednesday that not only is he not going to win the S.C. Primary, he might not finish in the top three.

The cynical might think he’s merely setting up low expectations to exceed Saturday. Romney says he’s being pragmatic, which is why his staff tells the Observer that after two morning stops near Greenville, it’s a safe assumption he’s flying tomorrow afternoon to Nevada, a state that happens to have 10 more convention delegates than South Carolina.

Says Mitt, according to CBS News: "I’m not looking for gold stars on my forehead like I was in first grade. I want delegates."

Ad watch - taking a swipe at Hillary

Three new S.C. ads out today:

Want to rally the conservatives? Never hurts to swipe at a Clinton, as McCain does today in his latest S.C. ad, in which he delivers perhaps the best line (albeit an old one) of Saturday's S.C. Republican debate.

Barack Obama is running two new ads in Nevada. The first, "President," summarizes his plans, including on Iraq and health care. The second, "Would," takes a look back.


Rudy Giulinai, in "Jumpstart," promises the biggest tax cut in modern history, plus a national catastrophe fund.

McCain leads (for now) in latest S.C. poll

A new Reuters/Zogby/C-SPAN poll has John McCain leading Mike Huckabee by six (29-23) in the S.C. Republican primary, with Mitt Romney (13) and Fred Thompson (12) trailing.

The survey was taken before the results from Michigan were announced last night, so the numbers will likely move, said pollster John Zogby on his web site.

Zogby says that Mitt Romney's Michigan win will likely help him cut into McCain's S.C. lead, but Zogby notes that McCain is doing well across the state, including places he did poorly when he lost the S.C. primary in 2000.

What does Michigan mean for S.C.?

We caught up with Observer political reporter Jim Morrill, who is doing reporting today on how Romney's win changes the dynamics in South Carolina. Watch for his story in tomorrow's Observer.

Primary Source: Given that no candidate has won two consecutive primaries, it seems momentum hasn't played a terribly big role thus far in primaries. (No, we're not counting Clinton's Michigan win.) What does the Michigan victory do for Romney in S.C.?

Morrill: It puts him back in the game. He'd pulled his ads out of South Carolina after New Hampshire and devoted all his time and resources to Michigan. If he'd lost there, he wouldn't have had much of a campaign to build on down in South Carolina, a state where he's spent a lot of money over the last year. Now he's competing with McCain and Thompson for the non-Huckabee vote.

Primary Source: Huckabee finished a distant third in Michigan. He's been trying to expand his evangelical base, but at what point does he begin to fight electability issues?

Morrill: Good question. Romney's victory in Michigan may help Huckabee in South Carolina by splitting up the non-evangelical vote. His base seems pretty solid so the more diluted the field, the better it may be for him. And yes, I think he needs to break out of his base to make the electability argument. But as long as you have a multi-candidate field splitting up the vote, the longer he may be able to postpone that.

Primary Source: Is it that unusual to have a wide-open field four primaries into the nomination process? Isn't January historically the time for sifting out candidates more than deciding on one?

Morrill: Well in the old days, candidates battled until June for the nomination, going step by step through a gauntlet of primaries. Part of what's going on here is that with the so-called front-loading of primaries -- and nearly two dozen on Feb. 5 -- everybody ASSUMED that Iowa and New Hampshire would gain in importance and help result in nominees chosen early. So historically, it's not that unusual.

Morning Buzz - Who's the real conservative?

Another lesson on why your Morning Buzz doesn't do predictions:

As late as Monday morning, John McCain led in the latest polls - both national and state's - save for a Detroit News poll that showed Mitt Romney creeping ahead in Michigan. Pundits began nodding at the inevitability of a McCain nomination.

Then Michigan's conservatives spoke: Mitt Romney.

Now, we're left to wonder if John McCain 2008 is John McCain 2000, fine in the states where independents and moderates wield heavy influence, but not in the places where conservatives do. (Hello, South Carolina.)

One thing we know: Many conservatives see this as a last stand of sorts for their party. McCain is getting hit hard by conservative talk show hosts and columnists. It will get worse.

Our questions of the day, then: Who's the real conservative, and does that matter to you, the voter?

Post your comment. The best comment of the day gets placed on the Observer's front page tomorrow.

The buzz:

New York Times writer Adam Nagourney asks if there's a candidate who can bring the Republicans together.

Michigan voters apparently didn't want to hear "straight talk" about jobs from McCain, says Washington Post writer Jonathan Weisman.

Robert Novak says the issue is simple: McCain's problem is that it wasn't an "independent" primary.

For the Democrats, Hillary Clinton gave "uncommitted" a walloping, and some voters are upset about it.

Meanwhile in Las Vegas, the Democratic debaters agreed on most everything.

In South Carolina, looks like a Republican free-for-all, say McClatchy's Matt Stearns and David Lightman.

Likeability playing a big role for voters, says The State's Gina Smith.

The dirty politics is about to get worse, says Newsweek.

McCain confronts new ugly rumors

John McCain’s campaign, determined not to let rumors again undo an S.C. primary bid, condemned Tuesday a new mailer that labeled him a "songbird" who gave away U.S. secrets to interrogators while he was a POW in the Vietnam War.

"Nothing could be further from the truth," said McCain’s S.C. communications director B.J. Boling.

McCain’s supporters believe he lost the 2000 South Carolina primary in part because of rumors - spread by George Bush allies - that McCain’s adopted daughter was the product of an interracial, extramarital affair. Boling said the campaign wanted to refute these rumors quickly to avoid a repeat of eight years ago.

The latest mailer was sent to S.C. voters by a group called "Vietnam Veterans Against McCain." In it, McCain is accused of telling interrogators combat information, including the order of which U.S. attacks would take place. An accompanying illustration also implied that McCain left POWs behind.

McCain has often talked about how he was shot down in 1967, spending his first months in prison in a body cast. When McCain’s captors learned he was the son of an admiral, they offered him early release, he said. He refused and was tortured.

Tuesday’s news conference included Orson Swindle, a McCain friend and Vietnam POW for more than six years. Swindle, who said the mailer was filled with "half-truths and misinformation," said returning POWs have faced such accusations for 35 years.

"It’s slander," he said of the mailer. "It affects voters, obviously. It’s very inappropriate in an election process. And it’s crazy, too."
-

McCain, however, is experiencing his own – albeit lesser - accuracy issues.

FactCheck.org, a non-partisan, non-profit program at the University of Pennsylvania, said today that a McCain mailer in South Carolina is riddled with inaccuracies about his and Mitt Romney’s records on abortion, votes on a Bush Tax Cut Plan, and a Woodstock Museum.

The McCain mailing was misleading with three assertions, says FactCheck.

1) "Romney provided taxpayer-funded abortions," a distortion. Romney’s Massachusetts health-care plan faced a court order requiring abortions to be covered.

2) It says Romney "refused to endorse Bush Tax Cut Plan," but fails to note that McCain himself voted against it.

3) It says, "Hillary tried to spend $1 million for a Woodstock museum" until "John McCain said NO." In fact, McCain wasn’t present for the most important votes on the project.

FactCheck says it requested a copy of the mailer from the Romney campaign, which complied after news accounts surfaced over the weekend.

"We have to be smarter about what and how we report"

For 20 years, Charles Bierbauer was a correspondent for CNN, where his duties included covering the White House, the Supreme Court and presidential elections from 1984-2000. He’s now dean of the College of Mass Communications and Information Studies at the University of South Carolina, where he teaches a course on Media, Politics and Government.

Today, he talks to the Primary Source about election coverage then and now – and how it benefits and suffers from the changing news media.

Primary Source: What do you miss least - and most - about your time covering campaigns?

Bierbauer: That's pretty easy. I don't miss the nearly constant travel of a campaign, on the road for perhaps weeks at a time. It can be fun, but it's also draining. On the other hand, riding the plane, the train and the bus is where you get the kind of proximity and access that gives a reporter the most insight on how a campaign works and how a candidate thinks.

If there's anything I'd miss, it's those few but valued moments of one-on-one conversation on a train traveling through the Carolinas with George H.W. Bush or on a plane with Bill Clinton in a policy discussion so engaging that you are startled to realize everyone else has disembarked. And of course, the adrenaline rush of being the reporter on the scene when the victory balloons go up or the bubbles burst.

Primary Source: How have new media, such as bloggers, changed what we perceive as political news? Have they hurt the qualiy of political discourse, or are we about where we've always been?

Bierbauer: Technology has made it possible to file reports from almost anywhere. That's good, and that's bad. The time for thought, analysis and in-depth reporting had been severely compressed even when I was covering campaigns.

The multimedia journalism now in vogue provides, on the one hand, more venues for reporting. There's less that falls by the wayside and goes unreported. On the other hand, perhaps some of it should. There is more unprocessed and unedited reporting. More stream of consciousness blog writing. More write-what-you-think opinion, rather than write-what-you-know journalism.

The blogs and citizen journalism mean more people are participating in the process. Greater engagement can be beneficial. There are more eyes and ears open to the stories that might otherwise be missed. When the blogs tip the mainstream media to stories they might otherwise miss, that's beneficial. When the traditional media chase wild-goose stories simply because they've appeared on a blog, that can be wasteful and detrimental.

The head of CNN once told me that a story we did not report was "one of the five best things we did" that year. The sheer volume of material that is now before us means we have to be smarter about what and how we report.

Primary Source: Our primary structure is different than when you covered presidential campaigns. Primaries are more frontloaded now, which is good for South Carolina, but are you concerned about the schedule's impact on other states?

Bierbauer: Yes, it's good for us in South Carolina to have the attention of the presidential candidates for as long as we have had it. Any South Carolinian who wanted to see a candidate could pretty much find one or more passing through town. Their ads are all over our television stations. South Dakotans don't have that exposure. As a result, we should have a pretty good sense of what each candidate stands for as we go to the polls.

But the mad rush among many states, ours included, to stage ever-earlier primaries and caucuses defies logic or need. It's made the campaign vastly more expensive for the candidates, crammed the bulk of the voters' decision making process into the first five weeks of 2008, still left some states out of the equation, and risked wearing us all out.

As an exercise, I asked my class last spring to rewrite Article II, Section I of the Constitution regarding the election of the president. They opted for the regional primary model that alternates between geographic quadrants of the country, rotating the order every four years, and leaving a month of campaigning between the four primary dates that stretch through the spring. Every state is assured some say in the selection, candidates have time to regroup and voters are not stampeded to the polls.

McCain in the lead ... everywhere

Your latest poll news:

Everyone loves John McCain.

The Arizona senator leads in new South Carolina, Florida, and California polls, with other Republicans bunched up behind him. Rudy Giuliani is a close second in Florida and one California poll.

For the Democrats, Hillary Clinton leads everywhere but South Carolina, where Barack Obama's lead has tightened a little over the New York senator.

As always, a caveat: One primary - Michigan for the Republicans or South Carolina for either party - can scramble a race, as we learned after Iowa and New Hampshire.

For all the most recent numbers, remember to go to The Latest Polls on the right side of the page.

Edwards "the only one" in flurry of S.C. ads

Today in South Carolina, the John Edwards campaign began airing unusual 10-second ads - standard campaign ads are at least 30 seconds - in advance of the Jan. 26 Democratic primary.

In each spot, images of Senators Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton appear on the screen while a narrator poses a question, including "Which Democrat opposed NAFTA and other trade deals that send American jobs overseas?" and "Who's the only Democrat that beats all the Republicans in the recent CNN poll?"

After the question, an image of John Edwards appears on the screen, accompanied by the words "John Edwards is the only one."

You can view the ads here and here and here and here. Edwards currently is in third in the most recent S.C. polls.

Other ads airing today:

Fred Thompson, looking to sustain the momentum from his strong S.C. debate performance, has begun airing this 30-second ad, titled "Always," in South Carolina. In the ad, Thompson touts his long-held conservative credentials.

John McCain, in "Service," talks about says his lifetime of work for Americans - and the work ahead.

Mitt Romney, in "Asian Tiger," tells South Carolina he'll "level the playing field" so American companies can compete with the Chinese.

Morning Buzz - Not ready for a black or female president?

The Morning Buzz is in a unmuddying-the-Republican-race kind of mood this morning, with primary voters in Michigan trying to sort things out today. We'll bring you the latest from there, plus South Carolina and Nevada, where votes will be cast Saturday.

We'll also visit today with Charles Bierbauer, a former CNN political reporter and now dean of the College of Mass Communications and Information Studies at the University of South Carolina. He'll talk to us about media and the differences in presidential campaigns then and now.

First, today's question concerns Rep. Mel Watt, who told the Observer yesterday he still is supporting John Edwards - in part, he says, because of "a concern whether the electorate would support an African American candidate or a female candidate for president."

Do you agree?

Certainly, history gives Watt a license for caution with progress, but is his perspective too cynical for you? Post a comment.

Your Morning Buzz:

The Observer's Taylor Bright reports that some Republicans won't forgive John McCain for his stance on immigration.

The State's John O'Connor reports that values voters will play a critical role in South Carolina.

In Michigan, the voting has begun, and Detroit Free Press columnist Stephen Henderson says Michigan's problems are America's problems.

Gordon Trowbridge of the Detroit News has six questions the Michigan vote could answer.

E.J. Dionne of the Washington Post has just one question: Which Republican is the most anti-Bush?

A Nevada judge says Dennis Kucinich must be allowed to participate in a debate there - or it's getting shut down.

Coming soon: Super Tuesday - with lots of states and not a lot of time. Dan Balz of the Washington Post covers what strategies the candidates are considering.

Rudy Giuliani's Florida strategy isn't going smoothly on the ground, writes Louise Roug of the L.A. Times.

The Wall Street Journal's Bret Stephens is thankful Ron Paul - and his foreign policy - remain on the fringe.

Obama and Hillary Clinton finally called a truce, says Patrick Healy of the New York Times. At least one supporter apparently didn't get the message.

David Brooks says Clinton and Obama got snagged in the net of identity politics.

Slate's Timothy Noah does some math and asks: Does Clinton actually have more experience than Obama?

Edwards "memo:" We'll fight for change (unlike you-know-who)

Our favorite campaign publicity gathering gimmick:

Release to reporters a "memo" from campaign to "interested parties" or "supporters."

"Memo" has sexy, insider feel. Reporters like sexy, insider feel.

Memo gets published, often verbatim.

Sign us up.

The subject line in the latest memo from the John Edwards campaign is titled, "Still not a two-person race." You can find the full-version here, released to the Washington Post, but we'll shorthand it for you:

1) New Hampshire showed that Barack Obama has a weakness: he's not a fighter. If you don't fight for change, you can't win.

2) Edwards is putting more campaign workers in Nevada, where labor support is strong (and the latest poll has him bunched up with Obama and Clinton.)

3) He's the only candidate who can run a spot in South Carolina named "Native Son."

4) The Democratic nomination is determined by delegates, not wins, and the race goes to the candidate who can compete widely over the long haul.

p.s. - Bill Clinton didn't win a primary or caucus until Georgia.

p.p.s. - The race has just begun.

Fight for black votes hurting Clinton, Obama?

Is race becoming an issue rather than a potential milestone in the battle for the Democratic nomination?

A tense week of quarreling between Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama - and their supporters - have Democrats worrying about divisiveness as the primary season enters states with more significant numbers of black voters.

The fighting began last week, after Sen. Hillary Clinton made remarks that critics said downplayed Dr. Martin Luther King, Jr.’s role in civil rights progress. She later accused the Obama campaign of distorting her comments, which he denied.

On Sunday, at a Clinton rally in Columbia, Charlotte Bobcats owner Bob Johnson made what appeared to be a veiled reference to Obama’s drug use as a young man. In response, a S.C. black leader and Obama supporter quickly criticized Clinton.

We caught up with Clemson University’s Bruce Ransom, an expert on race and politics, to assess what impact the battle might have on blacks in South Carolina and elsewhere.

Primary Source: Was this an inevitability, given the tightness of the election?

Ransom: What you have here is a fight in the family.

We have Sen. Barack Obama – his viability as a candidate is historic, even without getting into the issues. He has an appeal to African-Americans that’s rather broad, especially after his victory in Iowa and his performance in New Hampshire.

On the other side – let’s be blunt – you have a white candidate. However, it’s the wife of Bill Clinton, who is a friend to blacks, who has strong ties to black voters and the black community overall.

I said early on that there was going to be a fierce battle for the black votes, and that’s what you have here. But think about the most belligerent, offensive and disrepectful words that could be used here. You're not seeing that.

Primary Source: What’s the danger for each candidate?

Ransom: I think they’re both in some danger. The Clinton camp – on the one hand – even though they’ve had that allegiance and loyalty from blacks, they’re going to have to be careful what they say.

But the Obama camp has to be careful that they don’t overplay the hand they have, that they don’t go too far. They don’t want to comb through the Clinton’s words and protest, then have people say, ‘I don’t think that was disrespectful (of Clinton)."

How they play that will be interesting to watch.

Primary Source: We spoke last week about Obama and white voters in South Carolina. Is there an additional danger that he might alienate whites?

Ransom: Yes, it’s overplaying in a different sense. In terms of running a deracialized campaign – which he has – there’s has to be concern in the Obama camp that in the response to those Clinton statements, is he making an explicit appeal to black voters?

He has to walk that tightrope. Can he make that appeal without pushing the white voters away? Is he in danger of being viewed as no longer having a deracialized campaign? He has to be careful.
-
Will Clinton's or Bob Johnson's comments - or Obama's responses to them - influence your vote? Post a comment below.

A McCain surge in new national polls

Two signficant national polls out today - a New York Times/CBS News poll and a Washington Post/ABC News poll. As the Super Tuesday primaries approach, these polls become more revealing.

The polls show John McCain has surged to the front of the Republican race, leading Mike Huckabee by 15 percentage points (33-18) in the New York Times poll and eight (28-20) in the Washington Post poll. Mitt Romney is third in each and Rudy Giuliani fourth, illustrating the important that he win the upcoming Florida primary.

On the Democratic side, Hillary Clinton leads Barack Obama by 17 points (44-27) in the New York Times poll, but just five (42-37) in the Washington Posts poll. John Edwards is third with 11 percent in each.

Both polls show the economy as the biggest concern of voters, followed by the war. Health care and immigration were more minor concerns. You can find the full N.Y. Times/CBS News poll here and The Washington Post/ABC News poll here.

In state numbers, a just-released Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll has McCain leading Romney, 27-24 in Michigan. In Nevada, Obama (32%), Clinton (30%) and John Edwards (27%) are bunched at the top of the latest Reno Gazette-Journal poll, with more details to come.

For all the recent numbers, including Michigan and Florida, go to The Latest Polls on the right side of this page.

Morning Buzz - immigration an overhyped election issue?

The Morning Buzz welcomes you to primary week in South Carolina and Michigan, with caucuses in Nevada. The Republicans are trying to untangle their race in Michigan, which votes tomorrow, then South Carolina and Nevada, which vote Saturday. Democrats have turned what made this an historic election - race and gender - into the product of some ugly back-and-forth.

We'll cover those topics, plus the latest issues from S.C. and across the country.

But first, today's question is about immigraton. Is it an overhyped election topic?

Certainly, it's a legitimate issue, one that provokes passions unlike any, save abortion. But other than the zealous but relative few, it isn't an issue that turns a vote on primary or election day.

The latest indicator: an AP-Ipsos poll this weekend that showed 21 percent of Americans saying the war is the top problem facing the country, with the economy (20%) close behind. Immigration was at 8%. Only once in the past three years has immigration been a double-digit concern in the poll.

And as an election issue? Republicans, who in larger numbers cite immigration as a significant concern, find themselves with each of their party's major candidates wanting stronger border control, and with each candidate acknowledging that we cannot find and deport 12 million people who've already made it in illegally. Perhaps the biggest difference in the candidates? What they would offer to those here - a quick deportation with no return, or a place at the back of a very, very long line to citizenship.

Are those differences enough to change a vote? Rarely do we find a candidate with whom we agree on all issues. What issue, for you, is the one that will most dictate what button you push? Post your comment.

Your morning (and weekend) buzz:

The Observer's Tim Funk reports that Republican Mike Huckabee gave a sermon, not a speech, at a Spartanburg church - but still got his message across.

The State, S.C.'s largest newspaper, endorses John McCain. So does the Greenville News.

At a Hillary Clinton rally in Columbia, Charlotte Bobcats owner and BET founder Bob Johnson made what some think was a slap at Barack Obama's past drug use. Johnson has since denied the inference, but this incident could linger.

Race and gender have suddenly become issues for the Democrats, says the New York Times Adam Nagourney.

The L.A. Times says Clinton and Obama also have divided the important union vote.

The Chicago Tribune's John Kass is waiting for Oprah in South Carolina.

In Michigan, Mitt Romney and John McCain each lead a poll in a primary race the pollster calls quirkier than Iowa.

Detroit News columnist Noah Finley says his state's voters want to be inspired - but haven't been yet.

Mitt Romney is telling Michigan voters he and his father were car guys.

After years of aggravating conservatives, is John McCain about to face payback? Jonathan Weisman of the Washington Post asks.

Change. Sigh. Does it mean anything anymore? Timothy Noah of the L.A. Times wonders.

If the future of the country isn't enough to get you juiced about the election, how about the future of your wallet? Slate guides you through the various election futures markets, where you can invest in a candidate's chances to win.

Ever been inspired by a candidate?

Two Charlotte folks, Scott Carlberg and Denise Garbacz, have put up a new election Web site – LeastObjectionable.com.

You can guess the premise.

To participate, you simply select the candidate who is least flawed to you.

"The least pain in ..." the site says.

Click.

A small exercise in electoral cynicism.

Ha ha.

Except...

"It would be funny if it weren’t so important," Carlberg says.

He is 55 years old, owner of a public affairs firm (Talking Points LLC) that does organizational and marketing work. Garbacz operates FastForward Marketing in Charlotte.

Carlberg was born near Chicago – "My parents have passed away, but I’m sure they’re still voting there," he says. He is politically "interested."

He says he thought of the poll – which Mike Huckabee is leading – after listening to most every friend express dissatisfaction with most every 2008 election candidate. Carlberg has theories about our disillusionment – the oppressive thoroughness of our media, perhaps, or the candidates themselves.

Also, there’s this: Have most of us become incapable of being inspired?

Carlberg says none of the current candidates particularly excites him. But, he says, he remembers Tom Coburn, a congressman (now a senator) from Oklahoma who came back from Washington on weekends to run his non-profit medical clinic in Muskogee. Carlberg lived in Oklahoma at the time.

"I really admired that," he says.

Now, in this age of "personal" campaigning, we want to know: Have you ever been inspired, in a big or small way, by a candidate? Why or why not?

The most notable negative campaigning (thus far) of Election 2008

It’s early, but we’ve already had some memorable negative primary campaigning, with varying results:

1) Mike Huckabee, the target of several mailings and television ads from fellow Republican Mitt Romney, swung back – almost – with a negative TV ad he decided not to air at the last minute. He then proceeded to show it at a New Year's Eve news conference, and it subsequently was posted on blogs and web sites for free.

The video of the news conference - and the press reaction - is better than the video itself.
-
2) This one's notable for the response more than the content: Hillary Clinton, in an interview with Fox News on Jan. 7., got a little clumsy when she tried to spar with Barack Obama over Martin Luther King’s legacy.

Said Clinton, in an effort to note the value of experience versus words: "Dr King’s dream began to be realized when President Lyndon Johnson passed the Civil Rights Act of 1964, when he was able to get through Congress something that President Kennedy was hopeful to do, the president before had not even tried, but it took a president to get it done."

She continued: "That dream became a reality, the power of that dream became real in people’s lives, because we had a president who said ‘we’re going to do it,’ and actually got it done."

In today's New York Times, influential S.C. Congressman Jim Clyburn says he was disappointed in Clinton’s remarks – as well as another from Bill Clinton slapping at Obama’s campaign narrative "fairy tale" - and was considering an endorsement of Obama.

Said Clyburn: "We have to be very, very careful about how we speak about that era in American politics," said Mr. Clyburn, who was shaped by his searing experiences as a youth in the segregated South and his own activism in those days. "It is one thing to run a campaign and be respectful of everyone’s motives and actions, and it is something else to denigrate those. That bothered me a great deal."

Will this linger for Clinton?

3) Eight years ago, John McCain lost the S.C. primary to George Bush – in part, some say, because of rumors spread by Bush allies that McCain’s adopted Bangladeshi daughter, Bridget, was the product of an interracial, extramarital affair.

This week, McCain’s campaign featured Bridget in a mailer, supplied by ABC News, touting McCain’s anti-abortion platform. The McCains promote adoption, the mailer says, to help women facing crisis pregnancies.

So what’s negative? See page 2 of the mailer, which says (hello, Mitt): "Pro-Life. Not just recently. Always. Never wavering."
-

Can Giuliani win without S.C.(and N.H., and Iowa)?

Since South Carolina began its "First in the South" primary in 1980, no Republican has won the party’s nomination without winning the Palmetto State.

So why is Rudy Giuliani concentrating on Florida, as several published reports say?

Money might be an issue, the Associated Press reported earlier today.

UNC lecturer and longtime political observer Ferrell Guillory says different numbers also play a role:

"Sooner or later, we’re going to begin switching from counting wins to counting delegates," says Guillory, who founded the Program on Southern Politics (now Program on Public Life) at UNC-Chapel Hill. "That’s the premise of Giuliani’s gamble – that he doesn’t have to win these smaller early states. He can win the big states later."

Giuliani has likely been hurt by political discussion moving from terrorism and the Middle East to the U.S. economy, but he's been helped by a muddied Republican race, with no clearer frontrunner now than we had before Iowa. Still, Guillory says, the Giuliani strategy is: "uncharted territory."

For now, there is still much for the S.C. primary to answer, Guillory says. Huckabee needs to propel himself beyond S.C. with a significant showing. Romney needs to display staying power after taking hits elsewhere. McCain needs to show that he is more than just New Hampshire’s adopted maverick.

"South Carolina might not settle it," Guillory says. "But everybody except Giuliani has a high stake."
-
For readers: Your turn to play political strategist. Is Giuliani making the right move by concentrating on Florida?

Money troubles for Giuliani?

Midday update:

Is the Giuliani campaign having serious money trouble? The Associated Press reports that about a dozen senior campaign staffers are forgoing their January paychecks.

Barack Obama might pick up a critical S.C. endorsement, Rep. James E. Clyburn.

The Observer's Tonya Jameson checks in with the scene from a John McCain debate party last night:

"Nobody was going to stop the woman from getting her autograph. She elbowed her way toward the rope protecting the exiting Sen. John McCain from adoring fans at Studebaker's. As McCain stopped to thank yet another veteran for serving our country, the woman thrust her blue McCain poster in his face.

I'm used to this kind of muscling at concerts, but I didn't realize presidential candidates garnered this type of fanaticism. I especially didn't anticipate getting pushed around at a McCain rally.

Inside the popular club, "I Love Rock 'N Roll" quickly give way to "Let's Get It Started" and chants of "Mac is Back" as the senator entered the pre-debate party on Thursday. After several important S.C. people spoke, McCain gave his stump speech about integrity and honesty. Of course, he also thanked the veterans. Thanking the veterans is a big thing with McCain's peeps. After the brief appearance, most of the supporters headed a few blocks away to the convention center for the debate. "

Morning Buzz - Would you vote for 'crazy'?

The Primary Source is in a polite and conciliatory mood this morning after seeing the Republicans play nice - except for Fred Thompson, maybe - at the Myrtle Beach debate last night. Today we'll bring you post-debate thoughts and news from the Carolinas and elsewhere, and the Observer's Tonya Jameson checks in with a debate party observation.

But first, your question of the day concerns Republican candidate Mike Huckabee, who mentioned his "fair tax" proposal only once last night, which might be once too many for the health of his campaign.

The proposal involves eliminating the income tax and replace it with national sales tax. Some think it's it's hocus pocus; others say it's brilliant. The former sentiment should be troubling to Huckabee, not because people can't reasonably disagree, but because the perception of "crazy" can cripple.

Americans talk about change in this and every other election, but we like our change in digestible increments, if at all. We're having difficulty thinking of the last candidate to get elected with something radical as a significant part of his platform.

Reasonable or not, the fair tax is a proposal with little chance for reality anytime soon - the kind of idea that doesn't sell inside the fringe. A candidate can be otherwise thoughtful - as Huckabee is - but if he's seen as nutty once or twice, he's doomed to smirks. Ask Ron Paul.

Does the fair tax hurt Huckabee, in your eyes?

Tell us what you think. Post your comment

Your Morning Buzz:

Tommy Tomlinson says while the candidates tried hard to be the next Ronald Reagan, the candidate who sounded the most like Reagan might have been the one who didn't try to.

In fact, most of the debaters were kind of, well, nice, says the Boston Globe's Susan Milligan.

No one won, no one got hurt, lots of people probably yawned, says Newsweek's Andrew Romano.

For a frontrunner, John McCain wasn't much of a debate target, says Politico's Jonathan Martin.

Immigration? Not the top topic last night - and now campaigns are rewriting their scripts to accommodate the newest issue, a slumping economy, the Washington Post reports.

Outside the convention center, the protesters got creative, writes Myrtle Beach Sun News reporter Mike Cherney.

Rudy Giuliani is eschewing S.C. and Michigan in favor of Florida, writes the Globe's Brian Mooney.

Apparently, some people are becoming impatient with New York City Mayor Michael Bloomberg's indecision about launching a presidential bid, reports the New York Times.

Because we can't leave it alone: If Hillary Clinton's emotional moment really did win her N.H., that's a bad thing for women, writes the New York Times' Judith Warner.

But if other candidates want to show us more humanity, the Raleigh News & Observer's J. Peder Zane has some fine suggestions.

Barack Obama and white voters - a new challenge

Does Barack Obama's message transcend race? Supporters and political observers say yes, pointing logically to his victory in Iowa and near victory in New Hampshire - two of the whitest states in the country.

But Obama's appeal to whites might face a greater test in South Carolina, Clemson University political science professor Bruce Ransom tells us today.

"In both those states (Iowa and New Hampshire), the black population is less than 5 percent," says Ransom, a scholar in race and politics. "You don't have the history and the race relations and the tension that comes with it."

Such tension flares up regularly in debates about today's schools and equality in public funding, Ransom says. Obama's challenge also has precedent - blacks historically have faced more difficulties in Southern counties where the black population is greater, the professor says.

An additional difficulty: Obama still faces a battle with Hillary Clinton for black votes. "He's walking a tightrope," Ransom says. "If he makes too strong an appeal to black voters, he will undercut what appeals to white voters."

Can Obama maintain that balance?

"I think he's capable of doing it," Ransom says. "He's running a de-racialized campaign. He says 'My appeal is universal - it includes black people.'

"And whites recognize he's not Jesse Jackson. He's not an insurgent black candidate."

A peek behind the scenes in Myrtle Beach

Tommy Tomlinson has arrived in Myrtle Beach and its convention center, site of tonight's Republican debate. He gives us a behind-the-curtains look:

This morning about 11, I went to the Myrtle Beach Convention Center to get my credential for tonight's GOP debate. This was a full 10 hours before the debate (which starts at 9 p.m.) and there was already a traffic jam, which is the default option for all driving in Myrtle Beach.

It didn't help that people were slowing down to gawk at the sand sculpture across the street - which I mentioned in my column this morning - and then slowing down again to look at Fred Thompson's bus, which features a giant photo of Fred smiling. It is possible that Photoshop was involved.

A galaxy of satellite trucks was already in place - TV stations had been there for hours (to do their morning shows) and a couple of well-dressed reporters were napping in their vans.

If you want to get a feel for how the place is laid out, here is a floor plan of the Convention Center. The debate will be held in an auditorium set up in exhibit halls B and C - according to the Myrtle Beach Sun News , about 3,000 people will be in there.

One thing you might not know about these debates is that most reporters get no better view than you do at home. All the good seats in the debate hall go to donors and party officials, so only a small fraction of media members get to watch from there - everybody else is stuck watching on a big-screen TV in the media workroom (the Grand Ballroom area on the map). I went in early so I could claim a good seat in the workroom by taping my business card to one of the work spaces. Yes, this is quite the high-tech world we work in.

In between the debate hall and the media workroom is the most honestly named place in politics - the Spin Room. (It's Exhibit Hall A on the map.) That's where flacks for the candidates gather after the debate to make their candidates sound like geniuses destined for a shelf of Nobels and to make the other candidates sound like baby-seal-clubbers who fail to regularly floss. Nobody ever takes anything said in the Spin Room seriously, but reporters dutifully show up just in case, in a careless moment that could haunt the campaign, somebody in there tells the truth.

Now I'm off to take a nap. See y'all at the debate.

Quote of the day

John Kerry, 2004 presidential candidate: "I have a stronger, longer, broader, deeper record than John Edwards. ... I also believe I have the experience in foreign policy, national security, and military affairs, which is critical if we are going to prove to the nation that we Democrats know how to keep the country safe."

John Kerry on Thursday, endorsing Barack Obama: "Experience is not defined by time in Washington or years in office. It's defined by wisdom and vision."

Updated polls: McCain, Obama lead in South Carolina, Rasmussen says. Check The Latest Polls for all the recent numbers.

A big (or perhaps not) endorsement for Obama

2004 Democratic nominee John Kerry is supporting Barack Obama's candidacy.

The Observer's Jim Morrill reports from Charleston:

Kerry endorsed Obama Thursday in front of more than 6,000 people who jammed the courtyard at the College of Charleston.

"Barack Obama has the greatest potential to lead a transformation, not just a transition," said the Massachusetts senator and 2004 presidential nominee.

Kerry dismissed criticism that the Illinois senator is too young and inexperienced.

"Experience is not defined by time in Washington or years in office," Kerry said. "It's defined by wisdom and vision."

Obama said, "The time has come to build a new majority."

In an implicit criticism of his main rival, Sen. Hillary Clinton of New York and former Senator John Edwards of North Carolina, he argued that he is the best candidate in 2008. "The real gamble in this election is playing the same Washington game with the same players," he said.
-
A question for readers: Does this make you feel better or worse about Obama? Tell us your thoughts.

If the election were decided by yard signs...

Tommy Tomlinson, on his way to Myrtle Beach, checks in with this report:

If the president was selected by who has the most yard signs -- which is not all that more strange than how the sheriff is chosen in Mecklenburg County -- Ron Paul would already be picking out the White House china.

I've seen 10 times more Paul signs than ones for the other candidates combined. They were everywhere in Tennessee when my wife and I were there for Christmas. There was a giant one in a yard in Wilmington when I drove through town Wednesday morning. (Although the house also had a "FOR RENT" sign, which might be symbolic in itself.)

And driving down the Grand Strand on Wednesday, I compiled this sign count:

Paul: 11
Hillary Clinton: 3
John McCain: 3 (although the fine print was so small you couldn't read it from the road)
Rudy Giuliani: 1

This is despite Paul consistently polling at 10 percent or lower everywhere. With all due respect to his ideas, Ron Paul has about as much chance of being president as Michael Vick has of being this year's Super Bowl MVP.

So what's up with all the signs? Did his campaign blow all its money on the sign budget? Do the other campaigns think that signs don't make much difference? Do Ron Paul supporters just care more than anybody else? I'd love to hear any political pros (or knowledgeable amateurs) explain.

By the way, down at the Wilmington waterfront, somebody had drawn "DENNIS KUCINICH / STRENGTH THRU PEACE '08" on the sidewalk. In chalk.

God bless low-budget campaigns.

Morning Buzz - Time for Edwards to drop out?

The Primary Source is in a debating mood today, with the Republicans in Myrtle Beach to sort things out verbally for voters. The Observer's Tommy Tomlinson and Tonya Jameson are in South Carolina, too, and we'll talk with Clemson University's Bruce Ransom, an expert on race and politics, about the challenges Barack Obama faces with South Carolina voters.

Our question for you today:

Democratic candidate Bill Richardson is dropping out of the race, several reports say. Is it time for John Edwards to do the same?

He has vowed to trudge on for the long haul, but he is double digits behind not one, but two candidates. His message, so resonant four years ago, is grabbing fewer. Says one supporter on his chances, in an Observer story today: "You can't recover a fumble if you're not on the playing field."

Should Edwards stay for the sake of keeping his populist message out there, or would hanging it up now benefit the electorate by offering it a truer, less-cluttered picture of the Democratic race?

Or, are we prematurely dismissing him, as many did with John McCain?

Tell us what you think. Post your comment

Your Morning Buzz:

The Observer's Taylor Bright and McClatchy's Rob Christensen say that Edwards faces dwindling options.

Tommy Tomlinson finds us an honest politician.

Gina Smith of The State in Columbia says the debate could turn on the immigration issue - a hot topic in Myrtle Beach.

Meanwhile in Michigan, Democrats are battling an odd problem - their votes won't really count.

The Republicans, however, a running a real Michigan race - and Mitt Romney is making fun of N.H., the Detroit Free Press reports.

Politico's Peter Brown asks what the options are if John McCain isn't appealing.

On the Democratic side, the N.Y. Times says the race is about gender now - and that's a good thing for Hillary Clinton.

Robert Novak says N.H. was a reminder that Obama is running against two potent Clintons.

It also was a message to Barack Obama's campaign: wake up - says Lynn Sweet of the Chicago Sun-Times.

Were the N.H. polls wrong on the scale of the 1948 Presidential election? Pollsters, debate among yourselves. The Washington Post listens in.

Jack Shafer of Slate says something we all can agree on: Please, Wolf Blitzer, dial it down with "The Best Political Team on Television" plugs.

A tepid return home for Edwards?

John Edwards returned Wednesday to his native South Carolina after a distant third-place finish in the New Hampshire Primary. The Observer's Taylor Bright covered an Edwards' campaign stop at Clemson University, where Taylor reports the speech was short and the crowd less than raucous - despite the effort of Edwards staffers.

Primary Source: So how was John Edwards first post-New Hampshire day in South Carolina?

Bright: The crowd was not full of John Edwards supporters - though they were definitely there. It was an interesting place to have a campaign. Though Edwards was born in nearby Seneca, the Upstate is now overwhelmingly Republican.

Most of the crowd was made up of curious Clemson students. At one point, the Edwards staffers were having trouble getting any students to hold up Edwards campaign signs. This was the exchange I jotted down from some of the students:

"You guys want them?"
"Hell, no."
"I'll spit on it."

Still, overall, the crowd was polite if not loud or enthusiastic despite the efforts from the Edwards staff. Edwards was upbeat and looked good for someone who has just campaigned strong in Iowa and New Hampshire.

Typical of the crowd was Suzanne Price, 33, who works at Clemson. She likes what Edwards said, but doesn't' think he can win after his two losses.

"I would like to see him as a vice-presidential candidate," Price said.

In fact, most of the people I talked to who had made up their minds were voting for Hillary Clinton.

Primary Source: Edwards said last night he was in it for the long haul. Any equivocations on that today from him or his staff?

Bright: He emphatically said he was in it until he got to the White House. Any suggestion that he would pull out after South Carolina seemed to irk him a little bit - which is understandable. No candidate worth his salt is going to talk about withdrawing from the race when they're still campaigning.

"Long haul is to the White House," Edwards said. "How many different ways do you want me to say this?"

Afterwards his spokeswoman, Teresa Wells, said, "That's all we have to say about it."

Edwards needs to win South Carolina to stay competitive - although there would be a slight chance he could do well enough in the Super Tuesday to propel him. If he doesn't, the question of his staying in the race may be more germane. But, right now, Edwards is counting on his birth state - and a state he won in 2004 - to make him a contender.

Primary Source: What was today's message for voters?

Bright: He talked about how he was one of them - a son of a mill worker - and asked them to remind their friends that he was a product of the South - "The last thing you can tell them, is I'm from here, I know what your lives are like, and I will never, including when I'm President of the United States, I will never forget where I came from," he said.

Of course, he used components of his stump speech - a strong environment, the winds of change, a representative of the working man - but his primary goal seemed to be to get a jump on South Carolina and remind people that he was born in a little pink house in Seneca.

What does N.H. mean for S.C.?

We caught up with University of South Carolina professor Blease Graham, a 30-year scholar of Southern politics, to ask what the N.H. results mean for S.C..

He offers three thoughts. Read and be educated:

1) South Carolina is back in play for the Democrats.

Given the expected higher turnout from younger voters for Obama – and Obama’s slicing into Clinton’s vote among women – Obama may have even been a double-digit winner in S.C. Now, post-N.H., his victory may be closer and Clinton has a possibility of winning if the over-45 Democrat voters turn out in larger proportion.

Clinton has a longstanding organization, has many visits to the state and friends among established S.C. Democrats, and may need just to reinforce support before January 19 to take a second- or first-place share. Obama is challenged with maintaining enthusiasm and really getting the turnout.

Edwards may emerge stronger as "favorite son" and reduce shares to the two front-runners.

2. McCain has new life for S.C.

Michigan results may be a significant boost if he wins Romney’s "home state." (Romney’s father, George, was an auto executive before becoming governor.) It still looks like a 3-way race in S.C. with a prominent spokesperson for each candidate:

McCain: commander-in-chief, strong defense Republicans (appeal to veterans, patriots, help from Senator Graham);

Romney: business interests, Reagan claim on market economy, cut government but not defense, limited appeal to social or Christian conservatives (appeal to upcounty businesses, investors and developers, coastal residents from midwest, help from Bob Jones Senator DeMint.)

Huckabee: claim on values issues (especially if Romney is seen to be shallow), Southern appeal, friendly (appeal to upcountry evangelicals, scattered conservative enclaves around state, help from former Governor Beasley).

Right now: 1=Huckabee; 2= McCain; 3= Romney, but relatively tight at high 20s with Thompson maybe taking some moderate Republicans or Independents.

3) The underlying question

How will S.C. business interests, lobbyists – the establishment – relate to Huckabee and McCain? They will ultimately opt for Romney. Negative ads may hurt McCain on immigration issue.

Regardless of what happens in S.C., a candidate may stay alive (even if over the internet or with self-financing) if winning, placing, or showing until the big race on February 5. Thus, S.C. may not eliminate any candidate or identify a frontrunner as it did for George W. Bush in 2000.

How did the polls get it wrong?

Hillary Clinton trailed Barack Obama – often by double-digit margins - in most every poll leading up to Tuesday’s New Hampshire primary.

How did the polls get it wrong?

Maybe they didn’t.

"Probably the polls were right," Clemson University political scientist J. David Woodard tells us this morning. "But it’s a snapshot."

Woodard, who has helped run his school’s Palmetto Poll for 12 years, says an Achilles’ heel of polls is a volatile electorate. People change their minds, or they make up their minds at the last minute, while polls usually take a three-day sample – or more – of opinion.

"I read that 20 percent of N.H. voters were deciding on the last day," he said. "You can’t get a picture that quick."

Hunter Bacot, director of the Elon University poll, said most polls got every candidate’s numbers right but Clinton, whom the polls missed by nine or so points on average. That might be explained by a different last-minute factor, Bacot said.

"Did something happen within the last 24 hours? Yes," he said. "I’m not saying that Hillary’s emotional moment did it, but the coverage of it might have. It put her name out there – and in a positive way. And Clinton did well among women."

Other theories today include the difficulty identifying likely voters, as well as what Bacot calls the "social desirability factor," that voters might tell pollsters they like Obama, for example, because they don’t want to be seen as not liking the black candidate.

Bacot doubts the latter was a factor in N.H. "It seems like it would have been present in Iowa, as well," he said.

Whatever the reason, the N.H. results were a nightmare for pollsters. Woodard says he sweats out results each time. He remembers fondly the Palmetto Poll nailing the 2000 S.C. primary, but says: "We predicted the lottery would fail, and it passed."

What should we look for in South Carolina? Woodard has workers out in the field now conducting a new Palmetto Poll, which should be released next week. An early preview: Mike Huckabee is comfortably ahead, enough so that Woodard calls a Huckabee victory "a safe assumption."

Second place, however, is close between Mitt Romney and John McCain. The numbers on those candidates won’t be reliable until 48 hours or so before the election.

Then again, 50 percent of the people surveyed say they haven’t made up their mind, Woodard says.

"We try to be very guarded," he said. "But you just can’t tell."

Morning Buzz - a tearful victory for Hillary?

Today, in South Carolina, Election 2008 enters a new phase, as does the Primary Source. We'll have reports from the ground in the Palmetto State and interviews with Observer reporters covering the candidates and debates. We'll talk with experts across the Carolinas and elsewhere about the issues important in the Democratic and Republican primaries.

We'll also have fun. And we want you to participate.

Today's question takes a look back to last night's N.H. primary, in which Hillary Clinton surprised pundits and pollsters with a victory over Barack Obama. Some in the Morning Buzz below believe her campaign turned on that tearful moment Monday at a Portsmouth restaurant.

Do you think it made a difference? Why or why not?

Full disclosure: One day ago, in this space, we were skeptical. To quote: "The pro- and anti-Hillary camps have already decided on Mrs. Clinton. The few left in the jaded middle won't likely recast their vote on a teary moment at the end of a long day."

Were we wrong? Let us know by taking our poll ... or ... Click here to comment.

Your Morning Buzz:

The Observer's Jim Morrill reports that it's Clinton vs. Obama now in South Carolina, where the African American vote will be a new factor.

Your story of the morning: The Democratic winner gets roundly praised. Politico's Roger Simon says no one should minimize what Clinton pulled off in New Hampshire.

Slate's Mickey Kaus has four theories on Hillary's stunner.

Newsweek's Jonathan Alter says "the cry" certainly was one factor.

The Boston Globe's Jeff Jacoby says Clinton's teary moment reawakened her candidacy.

Maureen Dowd says Clinton fended off calamity by playing the female victim.

Not so fast with talks about a Hillary comeback, says the Globe's Scott Lehigh.

A fine night for John McCain, but even his supporters wonder what's next, says the Washington Post's Jonathan Weisman and Paul Cain.

From Barack Obama's N.H. headquarters, the Chicago Sun-Times' Carol Marin says the loss wasn't such a bad thing.

Turnout was supposed to help Barack Obama. Nope, says the Concord Monitor.

The Monitor offers some revealing insight from voters who made their decisions late.

John McCain's victory scrambles the Republican field even more, says the New York Times Michael Luo in an analysis of the races ahead.

The Boston Herald's Howie Carr says it's just not happening for Mitt Romney.

Dave Barry, as always, offers the bigger picture: Change wins, but that could change.

The old Clinton gang getting back together?

While we wait for the votes to be counted, two news items:

Fox News reporter Major Garrett says the ol' Bill Clinton duo of James Carville and Paul Begala - and perhaps some others - are going to join Hillary Clinton's campaign. Carville says nope, as does Begala. But Garrett says his sourcing on the story is "impeccable."

While most candidates are in N.H., CBS News finds Republican Fred Thompson in South Carolina. "This is where I've chosen to make my stand," Thompson says.

Edwards taking tacky shot at Clinton?

John Edwards didn’t hesitate to pounce on Hillary Clinton’s much-discussed teary moment Monday at a Portsmouth restaurant.

"I think what we need in a commander-in-chief is strength and resolve, and presidential campaigns are tough business, but being president of the United States is also tough business," Edwards said yesterday.

The comment came during one of Edwards' occasional gaggles with the press corps, says the Observer’s Mark Johnson.

"What's striking about the comment is that it seems to suggest Clinton is weak, playing into a stereotype about women that runs contrary to Edwards' past advocacy for gender equality," Mark says.

What do you think of the Edwards comment? Legitimate analysis or tacky barb?

A record turnout - what does it mean?

Mark Johnson reports from New Hampshire that turnout is "amazing," with supporters holding placards and an army of satellite trucks lining the streets in downtown Manchester.

Hillary Clinton's tears have dominated the radio talk shows this morning. The question: Did it make her look more human or more weak? Says Mark: "Reflects how Clinton folks didn't do a good job of humanizing her months ago, when they should have, even though they knew it was her achilles heel."

Your thoughts?

In midday news:

The latest polls, soon to be made obsolete by the N.H. primary results, show a closer Republican race than in recent days. One poll, Suffolk University, has Mitt Romney edging ahead of John McCain, 30-26%. Rasmussen has McCain leading 32-31. Democrats are seeing a tightening at the top, as well, although Reuters/Zogby has Barack Obama leading Clinton 42-29.

Two new South Carolina polls are out, with Rasmussen showing Mike Huckabee leading a tight Republican race and Survey USA showing Huckabee with a substantial lead. Obama leads comfortably in both polls.

N.H. Secretary of State William Gardner tells CQ Politics he expects a record turnout today. Convention says that as in Iowa, high turnout is good for the candidates who've stirred the most recent passion, Obama and McCain, but New Hampshire has a way of surprising.

Give us your predictions.

Morning Buzz - Hillary Clinton tears up

Yesterday, at a Portsmouth, N.H., restaurant, Hillary Clinton became briefly emotional while answering a question about how she manages the grind of her presidential campaign. You can find the video here.

It was not a moment reminiscent of Edmund Muskie - the 1972 presidential candidate (above) who famously seemed to weep during an outburst directed at the Manchester Union Leader. Clinton's moment Monday was neither defiant nor frustrated, but rather something entirely recognizable - a flash of emotional weariness at the evaluation of a long battle endured.

It was also an uncharacteristic display for Clinton, and it came on the heels of her "hurts my feelings" quip that prompted such a positive response at a debate two days earlier. Predictably, skeptics questioned the crack in her voice Monday. Was Hillary faking? Only she and her tear ducts know.

It wasn't, however, a scene on which her campaign might turn - up or down - as some are speculating. Whereas Muskies' indignant eye-wiping was a revelation to 1972 voters, Clinton already has been thoroughly examined by today's media and electorate. The pro- and anti-Hillary camps have already decided on Mrs. Clinton. The few left in the jaded middle won't likely recast their vote on a teary moment at the end of a long day.

Your Morning Buzz:

The early news: New Hampshire's most famous up-all-night voting towns give John McCain and Barack Obama the first two victories of the primary.

For once, Hillary seemed real, said the Boston Herald's Margery Eagan.

The surprising display was, her advisors tell the N.Y. Times Patrick Healy, a product of the stress, fatigue and disappointment Clinton has felt since losing Iowa.

If she loses again, her husband blames N.H. for the timing of its primary, says the Manchester Union-Leader's Kristen Senz.

The issues? Important. But voters want a personal connection, says the Boston Globe's Lisa Wangsness.

McCain and Obama both offer that to voters, says the N.Y. Times David Brooks, but they are very different men.

It's just like the old days with John McCain, says the Washington Post's Dana Milbank.

Your civics lesson today: N.H. independents can vote Democrat or Republican today. That quirk might play a large role in today's outcome, says the L.A. Times Maeve Reston and Doyle McManus.

One perpetual political storyline is change vs. the establishment, as Gerald Carmen illustrates in his recollection of the 1976 N.H. primary, which featured a Republican "change agent," Ronald Reagan.

Who said you had to be rich to run for president? N.H.'s easy filing requirements have prompted 42 candidates to declare. The Chicago Tribune's Jason George introduces some.

The Miami Herald says all this Republican indecision will make the Florida primary very important.

Finally, one more N.H. campaign moment: Mike Huckabee pours coffee for a vote.

Where's this bus headed?

Here’s a sampling of Mark Johnson’s day riding the press bus that’s covering John Edwards’ 36-hour trip across New Hampshire (and, we presume, back across again. N.H. ain’t that big.)

10:45 a.m.: Lakeport
1:45 p.m.: Bedford
3:55 p.m.: Hampton
7:15 p.m.: Dover
9:20 p.m.: Somersworth
10:15 p.m.: Rochester
11:25 p.m.: Durham
12:30 a.m.: Portsmouth

The trip began yesterday and went through the night, including a 2 a.m. stop in Berlin (about an hour south of Canada.) We caught up with Mark for the latest on New Hampshire and Edwards,
who Mark says rides on a different bus than the press, which the press riff-raff refer to as "the other America."

Primary Source: So who shows up to a 2 a.m. political rally?
Johnson: The reporters for one. We're on the bus for all 36 hours, which brings back blurred memories of college all-nighters. Years ago reporters used to rush to the pay phones (like the scene in "Airplane" where they knock over the row of booths.) Now we scramble for electrical outlets at every stop to charge laptop and Blackberry batteries so we can use them on the bus. My friend Dugald McConnell of CNN, a veteran Edwards reporter, has to also charge a camera and a cell phone.

I'm tall, 6'3", but have figured out how to stretch across the bus seats and grab catnaps with my coat (L.L. Bean, of course) as a pillow. That was helpful on the drives last night up and back from Berlin, pronounced BER-lin in the same syllabic reversal that we give to Con-CORD. Berlin is so far north he could have been talking to Canadians! That was the location of the 2 a.m. stop, a huddle of about 30 people at the one fire station in town. It was not surprisingly an orchestrated crowd of campaign volunteers, union folks and firefighters, the latter of which obviously had no choice but to be there. The fire department captain said a Red Sox player would get a bigger crowd at the same hour.

Primary Source: You wrote today about Edwards framing the Democratic nomination as a two-person race - he and Barack Obama? How's that assertion being received in New Hampshire?
Johnson: Sometimes it catches folks, but other times it gets a little muddled. He also depicts himself as the underdog to Obama and Clinton's much fatter bank accounts, so voters have to sort out how he can be both on par with Obama but an underdog to him at the same time.

Primary Source: Elizabeth Edwards said this morning that her husband won't drop out if New Hampshire is a disappointment. Give us a blueprint of what could happen next for the campaign. 

Johnson: Two routes seem obvious. First they could fizzle, finish a distant third and continue to swirl around the drain through Nevada and South Carolina until they run out of money and down they go. The other path, which the campaign would prefer, is that Clinton continues to fall and the story is all about her collapse. That makes Edwards the alternative to Obama. His folks think they can last – swirl but not go down the drain – because they've been surviving on limited money for months, scrounging for worms, while the cash-fat Clinton campaign won't know how to handle the downward spiral.

Primary Source: Polls have Obama surging ahead of the Democratic field? Is that an artificial enthusiasm, or are you sensing it there?
Johnson: It's real. He held an event the other day in Nashua and people waited 2.5 hours to get in. Estimates were as high as 3,000 people at that rally. Many likely had driven up from Massachusetts just to hear him, but that's common phenomenon in smaller numbers for all the candidates. He seems to be riding a wave. The question is what happens when voters start to burrow in more on substance and the question of experience.

Are the media in love with John McCain?

Just months ago, John McCain was finished, according to most every political observer. Now the maverick is a maverick again, leading Republican primary polls in N.H. and being touted as a sage and reasoned frontrunner for the Republican nomination.

The Poynter Institute's Jim Romenesko has collected some thoughts on the media turnabout. The New Republic's Jason Zengerle says the press loves McCain because the candidate gives reporters more access than they have to other candidates. Salon's Glenn Greenwald says this may be true, but more troublesome is how the press gets to determine the storyline of each primary - who is surging, who is struggling.

Also, this weekend, former candidate Joe Biden chastised reporters for declining to mention him in their stories, thus banishing him to obscurity:

“This," Biden told the L.A. Times, "is about celebrity. You’ve never given any of us a chance. You know in your heart I’m more qualified than any of these guys up top. I know you can’t say yes or no, but I know you know.”

While we're picking at ourselves, Time Magazine's Mark Halperin tells CNN's Reliable Sources host Howard Kurtz that he is bothered by how fickle his colleagues can be:

"I'm also embarrassed at the way, as we talked about in the beginning of the show, the way we careen back and forth between inevitable and dead. You know, you talked about it in the context of Hillary Clinton. Look at the coverage of John McCain. People just want to write his obituary for no good reason, not look at his ideas, not look at the possibility of a comeback. It happens all the time in politics, and yet we careen back and forth. And again, I find it embarrassing that we do it."

These are, certainly, not complaints that are new, and many in the media would argue that they are simply being responsive, that they give the most press to those who are drawing the biggest crowds or doing best in the polls. But in an election as undecided as this, with competing themes and candidacies to sift, the media play a more critical role in informing and, yes, shaping what the public sees.

Tell us what you think. How comfortable are you with the media's role? What would you like to seem them do differently?

Honey, it's CNN on the line again...

The phones have been ringing all weekend in New Hampshire, with six (yes, six) new polls out this morning.

Each has a similar narrative – Barack Obama continues to surge in the Democratic primary, with leads ranging from 3% to 13% over Hillary Clinton – and John McCain is maintaining a nice cushion over Mitt Romney among Republican, with leads ranging from 4% to 8%. John Edwards remains in third among Democrats, no closer than 6% to Clinton and 14% to Obama.

For all the polls, go to "The Latest Polls" on the right side of this page.

A few poll notes:

In two polls in which the question was posed, Obama passed Clinton as most electable among Democrats. In a Franklin Pierce/WBZ poll, Obama leads Clinton 38-30 on that question after trailing 48-21 before Iowa.

Republican Mike Huckabee may be getting a national bounce after Iowa, but he is averaging less than a four-point rise in New Hampshire polls.

Fifty-five percent of Democrats have "definitely decided" on their candidate, while only 42 percent of Republicans say so, according to a CNN/UNH/WMUR tracking poll.

In other midday news:

Mitt Romney has bought two minutes of airtime on tonight’s 6 p.m. news in Manchester and Boston (which serves most Southern N.H. towns). The video, entitled "Tomorrow," lauds Romney’s real-world experience.

Former congressman Jack Kemp has endorsed John McCain.

Finally, from the L.A. Times:

Erica Murphy, who handles public relations for a company in Ashland, N.H., simply laughs as she relates what she's been hearing lately from her four-year-old, Brandon.
Often around dinnertime, when ads for the various presidential candidates bombard the airwaves in the Granite State, Brandon will suddenly blurt out, in sync with what's he's watching: "I'm Barack Obama, and I approve this message" (or some such variation, depending on whose spot is on).
His mom adds that even when the TV isn't on, her son has taken to piping up: "I'm Brandon Murphy, and I approve of this message."

Morning Buzz - In defense of N.H.

Before the Buzz, some disclosure: I’m a New Hampshire native, from Windham, a small town south of Manchester. My high school bus stop was a few yards from the town hall, where presidential candidates gathered every four years. We shopped at the Manchester mall that candidates still like to visit, and we griped about traffic in that not-really-annoyed sort of way.

Each election season, we’ve endured new polls and new griping about how we are too white and too small to be so electorally important.

True, maybe.

But we have an answer:

(Cue America the Beautiful instrumental)

Bode Miller.

Perhaps you have heard of him. He is a skier who was supposed to bring the United States much gold in the 2006 Winter Olympics, but did not. He is our most famous athlete.

Our most celebrated native? Adam Sandler.

The N.H. primary is all we have for prestige, and because it is all we have, we are engaged with it. We attend rallies and study candidates and vote in our primary at a far greater rate than other states.

We are not kingmakers (see Pat Buchanan, 1996, and John McCain, 2000), and no, we are not terribly representative, but choose a state you’d rather see voting tomorrow, and we’ll find at least a few significant demographic weaknesses.

Our strength? We are small enough to vote with the benefit of real contact, because to win here, candidates must talk to us, in person, and often. Money has less influence. Media have less influence. It is the type of campaigning that so many lament is lost.

But it is not lost. It is happening today in diners, in town halls, in New Hampshire, tiny, snowy, usually inconsequential, American.

So back off.
-
Your buzz:

The Observer's Mark Johnson says John Edwards' new strategy is "Hillary who?"

There might be a small problem with Barack Obama's vision of a non-partisian Washington, says Jonathan Weisman of the Washington Post. That problem is Washington.

Dana Milbank says if the candidates were journalists, they would face firing for plagiarism.

We're spotting a trend here. Some people visit every Major League ballpark in the country. Some travel across the country to a primary to meet candidates, says the Manchester Union Leader.

Everybody is swinging at everybody, beginning with Hillary Clinton, plus Mitt Romney and John McCain, says the Los Angeles Times.

Even if the sniping rings familiar, there was some real change hidden in the rhetoric last week, says the Chicago Tribune's Mary Smich.

If change is good, is Bill Clinton hurting his wife's candidacy?

A fascinating interactive graphic profile of new hampshire, from the Boston Globe.

Which is the better quaint-late-night-voting-N.H.-town story? It's a tossup, says the Boston Globe's Peter Schworm.

If you missed it this weekend:

Mitt Romney won a primary.

Former senator Bill Bradley endorsed Obama.

There was lots of organized debating in New Hampshire. A thoughtful scorecard, from the Concord Monitor's Mike Pride.

With an assist from S.C. Sen. Lindsey Graham, Mitt Romney got caught in a fib.

Chilling with the frontrunner

Observer political reporter Mark Johnson, who covered President Bush and John Edwards for McClatchy in 2004, is a N.H. veteran. Most summers, he spends a week with his family at his parents’ cottage in N.H.'s lakes region, and he knows that this time of year, you talk about "wind chill," not temperature.

We caught up with him after a John McCain rally this afternoon in Nashua, where Mark reports that McCain was "not rousing but not boring."

Primary Source: How's McCain wearing the frontrunner's jacket? He's already taking hits from Mitt Romney today for not being an agent of change.

Johnson: He obviously feels good about the campaign and justifiably so. A couple months back the press and political chattering class had written him off. His campaign was in freefall. He's had an amazing comeback. He brushed off the Romney salvo, saying he has pushed reform in Washington. His best example was reform of the U.S. Iraq strategy. He was the only presidential candidate to push for the troop surge in Iraq, which is working.

He fielded a semi-confrontational question from the audience at BAE, a military weapons system manufacturer in Nashua, about a defense contract involving another company that got canceled. McCain quickly batted the question back, pointing out that two people were prosecuted over shenanigans in that contract, and he would always impose tough standards and cost cuts on contracts. That's the kind of bluntness that endears him to voters.

Primary Source: You're writing an interesting article for Sunday's Observer about New Hampshire flexing its independent muscles for four decades now. Why does the state keep coming back to a longtime insider like McCain?

Johnson: New Hampshire collectively shrugs off the Iowa results, especially within the Republican Party. You can't find a Republican who has won both states in the past 40 years or longer in an open race (with no incumbent president running). There is this New England -- everyone together now: Yankee -- independent streak that they'll decide for themselves. Democrats have sometimes won both Iowa and New Hampshire, but Granite State Republicans are different from their fellow GOPers in Iowa and elsewhere. They’re fiscal conservatives and want small government, but they just don't adhere to the social conservative issues. Republicans are more libertarian here. McCain is a perfect fit for them. He's proven himself a party maverick time and again.

Primary Source: Any sense of New Hampshire warming up to the thought of Huckabee after his Iowa victory?

Johnson: Judging from the folks I've talked to today, no. Following on the previous question, Huckabee's links, however real or perceived, to the religious right are a bit of a turnoff to the independents and Republicans I spoke with. The temperature, however, IS warming up. We've gone from a wind chill of minus 15 yesterday to plus 15 today. Break out the Bermuda shorts!

Who gets to play War Admiral?

"We are Seabiscuit."

So said John Edwards today at a rally in Manchester, N.H., where his wife, Elizabeth, compared the former senator to horse who overcame early losses in its storied career.

Said Edwards, in a Concord Monitor report:

"We have four days in New Hampshire to decide what fighter we're going to send into that arena to be the next president of the United States. I've got a suggestion. How about a guy who ran against two celebrity candidates, who've raised between them over $200 million, but with a message of change and a message of fighting corporate greed and corporate power on behalf of the American people (who) showed last night that message and what you stand for matters more than money."

Some numbers to bank on

The latest poll report:

There are a couple new ones from New Hampshire.

They are essentially worthless.

We've added both, a Zogby tracking poll and a Suffolk tracking poll, to The Latest Polls on the right side of the page. They show John McCain leading slightly and Hillary Clinton leading more than slightly. Both, however, were taken before the Iowa caucuses last night. At most, they are a baseline to compare future movement.

Instead, we offer a different kind of survey, from the online traders at Intrade, where "contracts" of the candidates chances to win their party's nomination are bought and sold. The leaders this morning to capture the Democratic and Republican nomination? Clinton and McCain, with Barack Obama and Rudy Giuliani each in second.

(In case you're wondering: A 2007 New York Times article noted that Intrade correctly forecast the results in all 50 states in the 2004 election - albeit closer to that election than we are today.)

Other midday news:

In Portsmouth, N.H., Mitt Romney is delighted with his "important victory" last night. Really.

In Nashua, N.H., Hillary Clinton unveiled a new theme in a striking speech this morning. From the Boston Globe:

Reeling from her surprisingly big loss in the Iowa caucuses, she is clearly reaching for a bold new way to combat winner Barack Obama -- though it doesn't appear she has settled on a consistent argument.
Clinton usually only talks about the Sept. 11 terrorist attacks when she speaks of her work helping Ground Zero workers cope with medical problems.
But in an airport hangar this morning, she said: "We have people who are plotting against us right now, getting ready to repeat the atrocity of Sept 11. We know it, I see the intelligence reports."
She also said, "I don’t think there has ever been a more important decision for the citizens of New Hampshire."

Later today, we'll hear from the Observer's Mark Johnson, in New Hampshire for a John McCain rally.

Morning Buzz - How big is the big Mo?

The Morning Buzz is in a
questioning mood today, with many to sort through from the Iowa caucuses.

Perhaps the biggest: Can Mike Huckabee keep it up?

In New Hampshire, no. While N.H. voters fully appreciate the concept of an unorthodox candidate, the state's distrust of government is only slightly more pronounced than its wariness of folksy evangelism. A third-place Granite State finish for Huckabee would be a triumph.

The better news: There's only five days between Iowa and New Hampshire - and two of them are on the weekend, when only the truly impassioned are paying attention nationwide. By next Wednesday, the Arkansas governor will be on familiar political soil in South Carolina, only slightly dented by N.H., but in a place more welcoming to his message and form.

It will be, with a wide-open field, the next test of many.

For now, a look at the Iowa buzz this morning:

The Observer's Jim Morrill and McClatchy's Rob Christensen ask if John Edwards can regroup quickly, without much money, for New Hampshire and South Carolina.

The New York Times' Patrick Healy asks: How deep was the blow Huckabee and Obama provided to the status quo?

It sure was a hit to Mitt Romney's ego, says the Boston Herald's Howie Carr.

How did Huckabee and Obama win? By working to get new voters, says the Boston Globe's Sasha Issenberg, who goes over the numbers.

The Des Moines Register's Rekha Basu takes a wider look. Last night's wins were all about feeling good again.

Why is Huckabee feared by his own party? Timothy Egan explains in a must-read from earlier this week.

Congratulations, winners. History says you're in trouble, the Boston Globe's Peter S. Canellos writes.

One last question about Iowa: Does it matter? Certainly, says former Sen. Warren Rudman. Not really, says a Washington Post editorial.

On to snowy New Hampshire, where the Concord Monitor's Melanie Asmar reports that the roads will be harder to navigate for the Arkansas governor.

The L.A. Times' Doyle McManus asks what happens to the GOP field when Mike Huckabee doesn't win New Hampshire?

And finally, from the Lessons Not learned Dept.: Huckabee chairman Ed Rollins violates the rule every campaign worker is taught: Watch what you say when you're out for dinner.

John McCain's speech

Thank you all very much. Tonight, I have a privilege given few Americans -- the privilege of accepting our party’s nomination for President of the United States. And I accept it with gratitude, humility and confidence.

In my life, no success has come without a good fight, and this nomination wasn’t any different. That’s a tribute to the candidates who opposed me and their supporters. They’re leaders of great ability, who love our country, and wished to lead it to better days. Their support is an honor I won’t forget.

I’m grateful to the President for leading us in those dark days following the worst attack on American soil in our history, and keeping us safe from another attack many thought was inevitable; and to the First Lady, Laura Bush, a model of grace and kindness in public and in private. And I’m grateful to the 41st President and his bride of 63 years, and for their outstanding example of honorable service to our country.

As always, I’m indebted to my wife, Cindy, and my seven children. The pleasures of family life can seem like a brief holiday from the crowded calendar of our nation’s business. But I have treasured them all the more, and can’t imagine a life without the happiness you give me. Cindy said a lot of nice things about me tonight. But, in truth, she’s more my inspiration than I am hers. Her concern for those less blessed than we are - victims of land mines, children born in poverty and with birth defects - shows the measure of her humanity. I know she will make a great First Lady.

When I was growing up, my father was often at sea, and the job of raising my brother, sister and me would fall to my mother alone. Roberta McCain gave us her love of life, her deep interest in the world, her strength, and her belief we are all meant to use our opportunities to make ourselves useful to our country. I wouldn’t be here tonight but for the strength of her character.

My heartfelt thanks to all of you, who helped me win this nomination, and stood by me when the odds were long. I won’t let you down. To Americans who have yet to decide who to vote for, thank you for your consideration and the opportunity to win your trust. I intend to earn it.

Finally, a word to Senator Obama and his supporters. We’ll go at it over the next two months. That’s the nature of these contests, and there are big differences between us. But you have my respect and admiration. Despite our differences, much more unites us than divides us. We are fellow Americans, an association that means more to me than any other. We’re dedicated to the proposition that all people are created equal and endowed by our Creator with inalienable rights. No country ever had a greater cause than that. And I wouldn’t be an American worthy of the name if I didn’t honor Senator Obama and his supporters for their achievement.

But let there be no doubt, my friends, we’re going to win this election. And after we’ve won, we’re going to reach out our hand to any willing patriot, make this government start working for you again, and get this country back on the road to prosperity and peace.

These are tough times for many of you. You’re worried about keeping your job or finding a new one, and are struggling to put food on the table and stay in your home. All you ever asked of government is to stand on your side, not in your way. And that’s just what I intend to do: stand on your side and fight for your future.

And I’ve found just the right partner to help me shake up Washington, Governor Sarah Palin of Alaska. She has executive experience and a real record of accomplishment. She’s tackled tough problems like energy independence and corruption. She’s balanced a budget, cut taxes, and taken on the special interests. She’s reached across the aisle and asked Republicans, Democrats and Independents to serve in her administration. She’s the mother of five children. She’s helped run a small business, worked with her hands and knows what it’s like to worry about mortgage payments and health care and the cost of gasoline and groceries.

She knows where she comes from and she knows who she works for. She stands up for what’s right, and she doesn’t let anyone tell her to sit down. I’m very proud to have introduced our next Vice President to the country. But I can’t wait until I introduce her to Washington. And let me offer an advance warning to the old, big spending, do nothing, me first, country second Washington crowd: change is coming.

I’m not in the habit of breaking promises to my country and neither is Governor Palin. And when we tell you we’re going to change Washington, and stop leaving our country’s problems for some unluckier generation to fix, you can count on it. We’ve got a record of doing just that, and the strength, experience, judgment and backbone to keep our word to you.

You know, I’ve been called a maverick; someone who marches to the beat of his own drum. Sometimes it’s meant as a compliment and sometimes it’s not. What it really means is I understand who I work for. I don’t work for a party. I don’t work for a special interest. I don’t work for myself. I work for you.

I’ve fought corruption, and it didn’t matter if the culprits were Democrats or Republicans. They violated their public trust, and had to be held accountable. I’ve fought big spenders in both parties, who waste your money on things you neither need nor want, while you struggle to buy groceries, fill your gas tank and make your mortgage payment. I’ve fought to get million dollar checks out of our elections. I’ve fought lobbyists who stole from Indian tribes. I fought crooked deals in the Pentagon. I fought tobacco companies and trial lawyers, drug companies and union bosses.

I fought for the right strategy and more troops in Iraq, when it wasn’t a popular thing to do. And when the pundits said my campaign was finished, I said I’d rather lose an election than see my country lose a war.

Thanks to the leadership of a brilliant general, David Petraeus, and the brave men and women he has the honor to command, that strategy succeeded and rescued us from a defeat that would have demoralized our military, risked a wider war and threatened the security of all Americans.

I don’t mind a good fight. For reasons known only to God, I’ve had quite a few tough ones in my life. But I learned an important lesson along the way. In the end, it matters less that you can fight. What you fight for is the real test.

I fight for Americans. I fight for you. I fight for Bill and Sue Nebe from Farmington Hills, Michigan, who lost their real estate investments in the bad housing market. Bill got a temporary job after he was out of work for seven months. Sue works three jobs to help pay the bills.

I fight for Jake and Toni Wimmer of Franklin County, Pennsylvania. Jake works on a loading dock; coaches Little League, and raises money for the mentally and physically disabled. Toni is a schoolteacher, working toward her Master’s Degree. They have two sons, the youngest, Luke, has been diagnosed with autism. Their lives should matter to the people they elect to office. They matter to me.

I fight for the family of Matthew Stanley of Wolfboro, New Hampshire, who died serving our country in Iraq. I wear his bracelet and think of him every day. I intend to honor their sacrifice by making sure the country their son loved so well and never returned to, remains safe from its enemies.

I fight to restore the pride and principles of our party. We were elected to change Washington, and we let Washington change us. We lost the trust of the American people when some Republicans gave in to the temptations of corruption. We lost their trust when rather than reform government, both parties made it bigger. We lost their trust when instead of freeing ourselves from a dangerous dependence on foreign oil, both parties and Senator Obama passed another corporate welfare bill for oil companies. We lost their trust, when we valued our power over our principles.

We’re going to change that. We’re going to recover the people’s trust by standing up again for the values Americans admire. The party of Lincoln, Roosevelt and Reagan is going to get back to basics.

We believe everyone has something to contribute and deserves the opportunity to reach their God-given potential from the boy whose descendents arrived on the Mayflower to the Latina daughter of migrant workers. We’re all God’s children and we’re all Americans.

We believe in low taxes; spending discipline, and open markets. We believe in rewarding hard work and risk takers and letting people keep the fruits of their labor.

We believe in a strong defense, work, faith, service, a culture of life, personal responsibility, the rule of law, and judges who dispense justice impartially and don’t legislate from the bench. We believe in the values of families, neighborhoods and communities.

We believe in a government that unleashes the creativity and initiative of Americans. Government that doesn’t make your choices for you, but works to make sure you have more choices to make for yourself.

I will keep taxes low and cut them where I can. My opponent will raise them. I will open new markets to our goods and services. My opponent will close them. I will cut government spending. He will increase it.

My tax cuts will create jobs. His tax increases will eliminate them. My health care plan will make it easier for more Americans to find and keep good health care insurance. His plan will force small businesses to cut jobs, reduce wages, and force families into a government run health care system where a bureaucrat stands between you and your doctor.

Keeping taxes low helps small businesses grow and create new jobs. Cutting the second highest business tax rate in the world will help American companies compete and keep jobs from moving overseas. Doubling the child tax exemption from $3500 to $7000 will improve the lives of millions of American families. Reducing government spending and getting rid of failed programs will let you keep more of your own money to save, spend and invest as you see fit. Opening new markets and preparing workers to compete in the world economy is essential to our future prosperity.

I know some of you have been left behind in the changing economy and it often seems your government hasn’t even noticed. Government assistance for unemployed workers was designed for the economy of the 1950s. That’s going to change on my watch. My opponent promises to bring back old jobs by wishing away the global economy. We’re going to help workers who’ve lost a job that won’t come back, find a new one that won’t go away.

We will prepare them for the jobs of today. We will use our community colleges to help train people for new opportunities in their communities. For workers in industries that have been hard hit, we'll help make up part of the difference in wages between their old job and a temporary, lower paid one while they receive retraining that will help them find secure new employment at a decent wage.

Education is the civil rights issue of this century. Equal access to public education has been gained. But what is the value of access to a failing school? We need to shake up failed school bureaucracies with competition, empower parents with choice, remove barriers to qualified instructors, attract and reward good teachers, and help bad teachers find another line of work.

When a public school fails to meet its obligations to students, parents deserve a choice in the education of their children. And I intend to give it to them. Some may choose a better public school. Some may choose a private one. Many will choose a charter school. But they will have that choice and their children will have that opportunity.

Senator Obama wants our schools to answer to unions and entrenched bureaucracies. I want schools to answer to parents and students. And when I’m President, they will.

My fellow Americans, when I’m President, we’re going to embark on the most ambitious national project in decades. We are going to stop sending $700 billion a year to countries that don’t like us very much. We will attack the problem on every front. We will produce more energy at home. We will drill new wells offshore, and we’ll drill them now. We will build more nuclear power plants. We will develop clean coal technology. We will increase the use of wind, tide, solar and natural gas. We will encourage the development and use of flex fuel, hybrid and electric automobiles.

Senator Obama thinks we can achieve energy independence without more drilling and without more nuclear power. But Americans know better than that. We must use all resources and develop all technologies necessary to rescue our economy from the damage caused by rising oil prices and to restore the health of our planet. It’s an ambitious plan, but Americans are ambitious by nature, and we have faced greater challenges. It’s time for us to show the world again how Americans lead.

This great national cause will create millions of new jobs, many in industries that will be the engine of our future prosperity; jobs that will be there when your children enter the workforce.

Today, the prospect of a better world remains within our reach. But we must see the threats to peace and liberty in our time clearly and face them, as Americans before us did, with confidence, wisdom and resolve.

We have dealt a serious blow to al Qaeda in recent years. But they are not defeated, and they’ll strike us again if they can. Iran remains the chief state sponsor of terrorism and on the path to acquiring nuclear weapons. Russia’s leaders, rich with oil wealth and corrupt with power, have rejected democratic ideals and the obligations of a responsible power. They invaded a small, democratic neighbor to gain more control over the world’s oil supply, intimidate other neighbors, and further their ambitions of reassembling the Russian empire. And the brave people of Georgia need our solidarity and prayers. As President, I will work to establish good relations with Russia so we need not fear a return of the Cold War. But we can’t turn a blind eye to aggression and international lawlessness that threatens the peace and stability of the world and the security of the American people.

We face many threats in this dangerous world, but I'm not afraid of them. I'm prepared for them. I know how the military works, what it can do, what it can do better, and what it should not do. I know how the world works. I know the good and the evil in it. I know how to work with leaders who share our dreams of a freer, safer and more prosperous world, and how to stand up to those who don't. I know how to secure the peace.

When I was five years old, a car pulled up in front of our house. A Navy officer rolled down the window, and shouted at my father that the Japanese had bombed Pearl Harbor. I rarely saw my father again for four years. My grandfather came home from that same war exhausted from the burdens he had borne, and died the next day. In Vietnam, where I formed the closest friendships of my life, some of those friends never came home with me. I hate war. It is terrible beyond imagination.

I’m running for President to keep the country I love safe, and prevent other families from risking their loved ones in war as my family has. I will draw on all my experience with the world and its leaders, and all the tools at our disposal - diplomatic, economic, military and the power of our ideals - to build the foundations for a stable and enduring peace.

In America, we change things that need to be changed. Each generation makes its contribution to our greatness. The work that is ours to do is plainly before us. We don’t need to search for it.

We need to change the way government does almost everything: from the way we protect our security to the way we compete in the world economy; from the way we respond to disasters to the way we fuel our transportation network; from the way we train our workers to the way we educate our children. All these functions of government were designed before the rise of the global economy, the information technology revolution and the end of the Cold War. We have to catch up to history, and we have to change the way we do business in Washington.

The constant partisan rancor that stops us from solving these problems isn’t a cause, it’s a symptom. It’s what happens when people go to Washington to work for themselves and not you.

Again and again, I’ve worked with members of both parties to fix problems that need to be fixed. That’s how I will govern as President. I will reach out my hand to anyone to help me get this country moving again. I have that record and the scars to prove it. Senator Obama does not.

Instead of rejecting good ideas because we didn’t think of them first, let’s use the best ideas from both sides. Instead of fighting over who gets the credit, let’s try sharing it. This amazing country can do anything we put our minds to. I will ask Democrats and Independents to serve with me. And my administration will set a new standard for transparency and accountability.

We’re going to finally start getting things done for the people who are counting on us, and I won’t care who gets the credit.

I’ve been an imperfect servant of my country for many years. But I have been her servant first, last and always. And I’ve never lived a day, in good times or bad, that I didn’t thank God for the privilege.

Long ago, something unusual happened to me that taught me the most valuable lesson of my life. I was blessed by misfortune. I mean that sincerely. I was blessed because I served in the company of heroes, and I witnessed a thousand acts of courage, compassion and love.

On an October morning, in the Gulf of Tonkin, I prepared for my 23rd mission over North Vietnam. I hadn’t any worry I wouldn’t come back safe and sound. I thought I was tougher than anyone. I was pretty independent then, too. I liked to bend a few rules, and pick a few fights for the fun of it. But I did it for my own pleasure; my own pride. I didn’t think there was a cause more important than me.

Then I found myself falling toward the middle of a small lake in the city of Hanoi, with two broken arms, a broken leg, and an angry crowd waiting to greet me. I was dumped in a dark cell, and left to die. I didn’t feel so tough anymore. When they discovered my father was an admiral, they took me to a hospital. They couldn’t set my bones properly, so they just slapped a cast on me. When I didn’t get better, and was down to about a hundred pounds, they put me in a cell with two other Americans. I couldn’t do anything. I couldn’t even feed myself. They did it for me. I was beginning to learn the limits of my selfish independence. Those men saved my life.

I was in solitary confinement when my captors offered to release me. I knew why. If I went home, they would use it as propaganda to demoralize my fellow prisoners. Our Code said we could only go home in the order of our capture, and there were men who had been shot down before me. I thought about it, though. I wasn’t in great shape, and I missed everything about America. But I turned it down.

A lot of prisoners had it worse than I did. I’d been mistreated before, but not as badly as others. I always liked to strut a little after I’d been roughed up to show the other guys I was tough enough to take it. But after I turned down their offer, they worked me over harder than they ever had before. For a long time. And they broke me.

When they brought me back to my cell, I was hurt and ashamed, and I didn’t know how I could face my fellow prisoners. The good man in the cell next door, my friend, Bob Craner, saved me. Through taps on a wall he told me I had fought as hard as I could. No man can always stand alone. And then he told me to get back up and fight again for our country and for the men I had the honor to serve with. Because every day they fought for me.

I fell in love with my country when I was a prisoner in someone else’s. I loved it not just for the many comforts of life here. I loved it for its decency; for its faith in the wisdom, justice and goodness of its people. I loved it because it was not just a place, but an idea, a cause worth fighting for. I was never the same again. I wasn’t my own man anymore. I was my country’s.

I’m not running for president because I think I’m blessed with such personal greatness that history has anointed me to save our country in its hour of need. My country saved me. My country saved me, and I cannot forget it. And I will fight for her for as long as I draw breath, so help me God.

If you find faults with our country, make it a better one. If you’re disappointed with the mistakes of government, join its ranks and work to correct them. Enlist in our Armed Forces. Become a teacher. Enter the ministry. Run for public office. Feed a hungry child. Teach an illiterate adult to read. Comfort the afflicted. Defend the rights of the oppressed. Our country will be the better, and you will be the happier. Because nothing brings greater happiness in life than to serve a cause greater than yourself.

I’m going to fight for my cause every day as your President. I’m going to fight to make sure every American has every reason to thank God, as I thank Him: that I’m an American, a proud citizen of the greatest country on earth, and with hard work, strong faith and a little courage, great things are always within our reach. Fight with me. Fight with me.

Fight for what’s right for our country.

Fight for the ideals and character of a free people.

Fight for our children’s future.

Fight for justice and opportunity for all.

Stand up to defend our country from its enemies.

Stand up for each other; for beautiful, blessed, bountiful America.

Stand up, stand up, stand up and fight. Nothing is inevitable here. We’re Americans, and we never give up. We never quit. We never hide from history. We make history.

Thank you, and God Bless you.

Whom do they love?

What should you look for as the caucus results trickle in tonight? We asked Dr. Blease Graham, a professor of political science at the University of South Carolina and scholar of Southern politics for more than 30 years.

The Exit Polls

The Associated Press and TV networks have conducted exit polls at Iowa precincts throughout the day. Those polls will show whether the economy or Iraq prevails as the issue concerning to Iowans, Graham says. A strong emphasis on economy will help moderate Republicans. "(John) McCain may surprise if Iraq is more important," he says.

On the Democratic side, watch to see if younger voters turn out – a test of Barack Obama’s ability to energize that demographic enough to participate.

The Results

"Not so much who wins as who is eliminated," Graham says. "The 15% ‘viability’ on the Democratic side leads to some candidates not having enough support to show. This could shorten the Democratic field to about three ‘viable’ candidates heading into New Hampshire as campaign funds dry up."

The biggest risk: "(John) Edwards, who seems to be running a 1976 Carter-type campaign, although as an economic reformer, rather than a moralistic one," says Graham. "Third place would be a disappointment for Edwards."

As with the Democrats, a poor showing – less than third – will be a problem for any Republican candidate. One possible surprise: Graham sees an opportunity for McCain to stage a comeback of sorts tonight heading into New Hampshire. "Interesting to note," he says, "that S.C. senator Graham is in Iowa for McCain. Senator DeMint is there for Romney."

Implications for New Hampshire and South Carolina

"We may also get some idea of what happens next," Graham says, "especially with fewer candidates – who leads, who claims momentum, who hangs on maybe as a spoiler in the continued debates and campaigns."

South Carolina is the first test, he says, of wider primary participation – including minority voters for Democrats. "Depending on Iowa and N.H. results, S.C. may be the last stand for Clinton against Obama and Romney against Huckabee or McCain," Graham says.

Also: "S.C. Independent voters may play an important role if they identify more with S.C. Democrats than Republicans. If so, the ‘change’ message may resonate to help Obama and maybe Edwards vs. Clinton."

The Associated Press expects Iowa’s results to start arriving about 15-30 minutes after the first caucus begins at 7 p.m. local time, 8 p.m. eastern. The Republican results will come in first because of a more-complicated Democratic selection process. Expect final results from the Democrats about 11 p.m., the Republicans sometime before that.