Taking the air out of the bounce

Dean Barnett:

...

So why no bouncing? The trendy theorists will probably credit a variation of the Feiler Faster Thesis, or FTT as the cool wonks call it. FTT holds that in a faster paced society blanketed by blogs and other life-quickening plagues, news cycles churn more quickly. As a consequence, primary results that were big news when they occurred get supplanted by Britney Spears's latest woes before the next state's voters hit the polling booths.

The FTT is a brilliant observation, but it's not why there's been no bouncing on the Republican side in 2008. Lest we forget, Barack Obama has received a discernible and significant bounce from his Iowa victory, even if it hasn't been of the same magnitude as Kerry's. On the morning of January 3, before Iowans trudged out to their caucuses, Obama trailed Hillary in the Rasmussen national tracking poll by 17 points. His deficit in the polls composed of exclusively post-New Hampshire numbers has hovered between two and seven points.

Yes, Obama has seen a more modest bounce than John Kerry did, but his Iowa win still amply illustrates the fruits of a prominent caucus or primary victory--the voters will reward the winner with a closer look. Obama benefited from their scrutiny. Democrats liked what they saw. But he didn't run away from the pack because he faced far more formidable opposition than Screamin' Howard Dean.

Like Obama, Republican winners have also won a closer look from the voters. The increased scrutiny hasn't been the undiluted blessing for the Republican victors that it's been for Obama.

Iowa conqueror Mike Huckabee is a problematic candidate on many levels for many Republicans. No one really expected New Hampshirites to take a closer look at Huckabee and flock to him in droves. Nevertheless, many analysts thought he would do better in New Hampshire than he did. Much of the whispering in the fashionable Nashua salons frequented by the high-end pundits forecast Huckabee passing Romney in New Hampshire and earning the Granite State's silver medal. Close students of recent history know that didn't happen.

Like Huckabee, John McCain is also a problematic candidate for many GOP voters given the way he found himself opposing so many conservative causes over the past seven years. One would have expected the spotlight to treat McCain like a poorly aged starlet, and that's exactly how it's worked out so far. Ever the iconoclast, McCain seemed oddly determined this week to highlight some of the more arcane differences he has with the GOP, ones that would especially damage him in Michigan. In a debate, he called attention to his concern over climate warning. Later, he vowed not to drill for oil in ANWR.

...

Anyone who vows not to drill in ANWR is not just wrong, they are an idiot. There is no rational reason not to drill in ANWR. All the reasons put forward are just nonsensical. There is no more reason to think that drilling there will cause pollution than there is for drilling in Texas where it happens all the time. There is no value in having a "pristine" wilderness area. None. Our failure to drill there is costing our economy billions of dollars and harms our national security. We should be drilling in ANWR and drilling in off shore areas of all our coasts. If we did, we would not need to import oil for anywhere and we could be getting it at much more favorable prices.

His comments on the lack of the bounce this year are also important, but mentioning ANWR always brings out the rant in me. ANWR is evidence of the Democrats' and environmental movement's hatred of energy production. It is similar to their hatred of nuclear energy which was evident at the Democrat debate in Nevada. We need to overcome this hatred and prejudice to become a more energy efficient society.