Were you reading this blog during the 2008 election season? If so, you may remember my election prediction posts that took you over to Hominid Views. This year, I’ll post the election predictions here.

I’ve spend the past week collecting polls, updating the software, creating a clickable cartogram for the 2012 electoral college, updating the FAQ, and figuring out how to make it all work on Horsesass. The first analysis for the presidential election will be posted later today.

At this point, I am only doing analyses of an Obama versus Romney general election. As much as I would like to see one of the weaker candidates take the G.O.P. nomination, I’m pretty certain Republicans will, as they did in 2008, act rationally, and chose the candidate that performs best against Obama in head-to-head polling. That is currently Mitt Romney. As the Republican primary circus continues, I’ll reassess. If, say, Santorum trickles on up to the front (eww!) or there is a crazy surge for Ron Paul, or the Mittster takes a tumble after unintentionally tweeting a photo of his underwear, or Rick Perry challenges the rest of ’em to a duel (and wins), I’ll switch do doing analyses for the new front-runner(s).

Later in the election season, I add senatorial and gubernatorial analyses as well.

When I post these analyses, there are occasionally naysayers. They complain that polls are meaningless, the analysis is flawed, or the results are not predictive, or “can’t we just wait for the ‘real poll'”, blah, blah, blah. I’ll repeat my counterargument.

It works the same way as the score at a sporting event. The first quarter score in, say, a basketball game doesn’t typically allow you to determine the eventual winner. The score, the spread, the amount of playing time remaining, and the recent changes in scoring momentum gives a good feel for how the game has progressed, who might win if things continue in the same vein, and what each team needs to do to attain victory. Somehow I think fans would not appreciate basketball scores being hidden until the the game has concluded.

Same with the election analyses. They aren’t predictions of the outcome on election day. Instead, they show the score so far. And the currency is a probability of winning, if the “game” ended now.

Another point from the naysayers in 2008 is that Nate Silver, now at the NY Times, does similar analyses, and everyone knows he is the best. Mr. Silver is an entertaining writer, and does a very nice job with graphics and site design. And since he does this stuff full time, he is quite prolific. Here is the problem I had with his 2008 analyses. He used a complicated (nearly proprietary) analysis that involved using information beyond simple polling data. This ancillary information was included as a pseudo-poll in his analyses. My preference is for a straightforward, data driven analysis that makes the fewest assumptions necessary.

But the proof of the pudding is in the eating…so how did we each do in 2008? Here is his last pre-election post and here is mine. We both missed a single state—Indiana. The late polling in Indiana gave McCain a sliver of a lead, and the “big poll” came down in favor of Obama by a 1% margin.

For the electoral college, Mr. Silver projected a 349 to 189 victory for Obama and I projected a 364 to 174 victory for Obama. The actual result was 365 to 173. I was off by one vote.

This one vote discrepancy, in fact, reflected a weakness of my analysis. I ignored the possibility that either Nebraska or Maine might split their electoral votes. Nebraska’s 1st district did split in 2008, giving one of the state’s electors to Obama. If I had included this little detail, my projection would have been spot on. For the 2012 elections, I have already added separate analyses of Nebraska districts, and will do so for Maine when some district-level polling data becomes available.

For more information on the methods used, please visit the draft of the new simulation FAQ. Also if you have recommended changes or have additional questions for the FAQ, please mention them in the comment thread.

Update: The Obama-Romney analyses can be found here. There is now a side-bar blurb, too.

Young Turks: FAUX News’ curious Christmas poll.

Thom debates Horace Cooper on voter fraud.

Jennifer Granholm ponders how Republicans get people across the country to vote against their own interests:

Newsy: Unemployment hits a three-year low.

Young Turks: What Americans think about socialism.

Alynoa’s Tool Time: Capital One is greedy.

Thom with The Good, The Bad, and The Very, Very Ugly.

Ed: Obama campaign lays out multiple pathways to victory.

The G.O.P. Primary Reality Show:

• Maddow: Iowa chaos!
• Sharpton: Who is more dangerous for America?
• Buzz 360: Iowa polls are all over the freakin’ place.
• Maddow: Going rogue in Iowa.
• The Obama campaign lays out multiple pathways to victory.
• The nutcases caucus for Sarah Palin in Iowa.
• Buzz 360: The I’s that really matter.
• Thom: …then THEY came for Newt & then Perry!!!
• Young Turks: Newt chokes up over his mother.
• Newt considers Sarah Palin for his Energy Czar (via Right Wing Watch):
  [audio:http://www.rightwingwatch.org/sites/default/files/mp3/Newt Gingrich Palin VP 12-29-11.mp3]
• Lawrence O’Donnell: Newt’s disorganized campaign.
• Newt intends to pack courts with judges from Regent & Liberty University, Federalist Society (via Right Wing Watch):
  [audio:http://www.rightwingwatch.org/sites/default/files/mp3/Newt Gingrich WallBuilders Judiciary Regent 12-28-11.mp3]
• Young Turks: Newt’s energy flip-flops are a case study in corruption.
• Thom: Did new voter I.D. laws bite Newt in the ass?.
• What is Mitt hiding?
• Young Turks: Bachmann’s Iowa State Chair jumps ship to Ron Paul.
• Ed: Bachmann’s campaign implodes. Accusations fly.
• Newsy: Bachmann’s campaign manager jumps ship.
• Newsy: Romney takes aim at Big Bird.
• Mitt Romney takes aim at Big Bird.
• Young Turks: Mitt wants to turn Big Bird into a corporate whore.
• Ezra Klein: Republicans self-disenfranchisement.
• The Romney Rule (via Crooks and Liars).
• Newsy: Perry’s part-time Congress idea.
• Young Turks: Racism isn’t the worst thing about Ron Paul (via Crooks and Liars).
• Young Turks: Ron Paul’s more sinister than ‘peace, love and no jail for pot’
• Ed, Pap and Lizz: Michele meets metal man.
• WTF??? Michele reads speech from iPAD (i.e. teleprompter) (via Crooks and Liars).
• Animated Santorum.
• Newsy: Santorum surges from behind!
• Sharpton: Santorum’s solution for joblessness.
• Lawrence O’Donnell: G.O.P. establishment efforts to destroy Santorum are on!

Buzz 60: A weekend left in Iowa.

Young Turks: Crazy right wing group’s ad with straight couple in cross-hairs.

Newsy: Very bad news for Republicans—Unemployment hits three-year low.

Sharpton: Oddly…Republicans have no concerns about voter fraud in Iowa caucus.

Thom to US Senator Ron Wyden (D- OR): “You’re fired!”

The Obamas wish you and military families “happy holidays”.

Young Turks: Larry “wide stance” Craig IS BAAAAAAACK.

Seattle protesters do a Christmas foreclosure on Bank of America (via Crooks and Liars).

Thom with some more Good, Bad, and Very, Very Ugly.

Year In Review:

• The top 10 G.O.P. moments of 2011:
• Mark Fiore: The year in crazy.
• Ann Telnaes: Year in Review.
• 2011: Year of OWS
• Ezra Klein: The year in repealing and replacing:
• Lawrence O’Donnell: The year in political comedy.

Pap: The Republican’s war on voting.

Not exactly Rick Snyder (R-MI).

Young Turks: Good riddance, Sen. Ben Nelson.

Thom: NE Democrats…take back your state!.

White House: West Wing Week.

Mark Fiore: Aggregating Arianna.

Alyona: TSA needs more intel, less groping.

Newsy: Ben Nelson retirement to hurt Democrats?

Cenk: Has Obama beaten Republicans at their own game?

Ed: Justice Department blocks SC voter suppression laws.

Thom: TSAs Security Theater is going on the road!

Last week’s Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza can be found here.

Current Attorney General and gubernatorial wannabe Rob McKenna is feeling the heat over an early December AP piece showing the “State payouts up threefold under [him]”:

During his 2004 campaign for attorney general, Rob McKenna vowed that he would use the position to curb how much state agencies pay out for major lawsuits. Instead, those costs have grown rapidly under his watch.

Today’s TNT has a letter defending McKenna from Rob Costello, a deputy AG, and Howard Fischer, a senior assistant AG:

The Washington attorney general and the men and women of the Attorney General’s Office who defend the state in lawsuit deserve a more balanced telling of the story regarding lawsuit payouts than they received in this Associated Press article.

They go on to blame it on the legislature that eliminated immunity to lawsuits…in 1961. I don’t think so. A non-immunity bill passed before Rob McKenna was conceived could be used to explain a higher lawsuit burden in Washington compared to states with immunity provisions, but not the three-fold increase under McKenna since he was elected in 2004.

But that isn’t what caught my eye. This is (emphasis added):

In 2004, as a candidate for attorney general, Rob McKenna promised to reduce lawsuits by seeking reforms to state liability laws. If any significant savings are to be achieved, this is absolutely the right place to look, and McKenna has consistently done so. He has worked to inform legislators and has repeatedly invited the Legislature to revisit and reform state tort laws. Every major proposal, however, was killed in committee.

Two points. First Rob McKenna didn’t keep his 2004 promise. He had grand ideas about what an agent of change he could be, and he engaged in some slick campaigning to let everyone know. But he failed to live up to his promises. Perhaps I am being unfair…I mean, McKenna didn’t have complete control over it. He had to work with the Legislature. On the other hand, he knew he would have to work with the Legislature when he made the promise.

The second point. McKenna failed to succeed in working with the Legislature. Keeping his promise required him to be highly skillful in working with the legislative and executive branches. It required him to go beyond being a slick campaigner to actually get something he promised done. He couldn’t and he didn’t. He failed as a politician.

And now he wants to be Governor?

Remember this when he makes slick promises that sound too good to be true.

Either he hasn’t thought through what he must do to make it happen, or he isn’t a skillful enough politician to see it through.

Please join us tonight for an end-of-the year evening of politics under the influence at the Seattle Chapter of Drinking Liberally.

We meet at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Starting time is 8:00 pm, but some folks will show up earlier for dinner.

Here’s what you need to know about Iowa:

Can’t make it to Seattle? There are also meetings tonight of the Tri-Cities chapter and the Bellingham chapter of Drinking Liberally. And tomorrow the Burien chapter meets. Also next Monday, there are meetings of the Olympia chapter, the Yakima chapter, and the South Bellevue chapter.

With 232 chapters of Living Liberally, including twelve in Washington state and six more in Oregon, chances are excellent there’s one near you.

NY Times tech blogger Nick Bilton has a thorn up his ass about the FAA prohibitions on electronic devices during take-off and landing. Bilton just cannot understand why some pilots are now being allowed to use iPads in the cockpit for paper flight manuals but he cannot use his Kindle for the take-off and landing parts of the flight.

As it happens, this is one of Goldy’s pet peeves as well. Neither person seems to believe that electronic devices can affect flight safety during critical (take-off and landing) phases of flights. At least Goldy leaves it at complaining and denial. But not Nick Bilton.

Bilton decided to do something about it. You know, use science and technology to “prove” that electronic devices are safe.

What he did, however, amounts to horse shit. As I show below, Bilton, sets-up and then destroys a straw-man argument.
[Read more…]

— Politico’s top unanswered political questions for 2012

— Washington’s minimum wage goes up next week

— Goldy: “An NHL team? Fuck yeah!”

— Washington business leaders are open to a tax increase

— Seattle’s Lee Rhodes, creator of the Glassybaby, is awarded Entrepreneur Magazine‘s Entrepreneur of 2011

— TPM’s Year in Photos

Thom with The Good, The Bad, and The Very, Very Ugly.

Robert A. Niblock, CEO of Lowe’s is, Worst Person in the World.

Greenman: .

Young Turks: Police departments use drones to spy on Americans.

WI Secretary of State Scott Fitzgerald confirms his role as Worst Person in the World.

Politifact Gets Their Facts Wrong:

• Thom: Who’s fact checking the fact checker.
• Sam Seder: Politifact becomes Politi-not-so-fact.

Liberal Viewer: Detention without trial now in US law?

Young Turks: Hedge fund managers meet in secret with politicians.

Christmas goes Political:

• How the Gingrich Stole Christmas:
• Susie Sampson tackles the War on Christmas.
• The Obamas honor military families for the holidays.
  
• Mark Fiore: Twas the Night before Newt.
• Maddow: Newt’s little Virginia problem.
• Young Turks: Pro-adultery site endorses The Newt.
• Hell freezes over? Thom agrees with Newt about stopping the Supreme Court.
• Maddow: Palin on Obama’s Christmas card.
• Young Turks: Newt’s “arrest ‘activist’ Judges with U.S. Marshalls”.
• Red State Update: Divided nation Christmas:
• Santa Election.
• Sam Seder and friends with an update on The War on Christmas.
• Eric Schwartz: Christmastime in LaLa Land.
• A Christmas Carol For the Rest of Us:

Ed: Gov. Scott walker schooled by constituent on voter fraud.

Ann Telnaes: Shooting for Justice.

Thom: How Republicans, the Koch Bros & Walker could lose the right to vote.

Sam Seder: GOP lies, “Unemployment benefits encourage people not to work”.

The G.O.P. Christmas Massacre of 2011:

• Olbermann and Sen. Chris Coons (D-DE) on What is going on in the house.
• Thom: The Teabagger Republicans just raised taxes on the 99%s.
• Young Turks: Republicans even lost the Wall Street Journal!
• Last Word: Boehner’s problem.
• Olbermann speaks with Rep. Louise Slaughter (D-NY) on the ideological battle behind it.
• Maddow: The Battle Royale in GOP D.C.
• Thom: Instead of tax breaks…G.O.P. vote on a bust of Churchill, out of Wingding conspiracy theory.
• President Obama: What 40 Dollars Means.
• Alyona: Republicans cave, Democrats show they have some balls (post OWS).
• Olbermann with Andy Kroll: Why Boehner caved.
• Obama’s big Christmas gift.

DADT just got its iconic image (via Slog).

Nutcase Ted Nugent crazies his way to Worst Person in the World.

White House: West Wing Week.

Alyona: Occupy the Iowa Caucus.

Young Turks: “Fetal personhood” initiative ruled misleading.

Thom with some more Good, Bad, and Very, Very Ugly.

The G.O.P. Primary Carnival:

• Ed with Howard Dean on Newt and Mitt.
• Gingrich and Paul scare the bejesus out of Republican Leaders. Score, Mitt!
• “Any President Mr. Romney? Really”?
• Alyona’s Tool Time: Mitt Romney wants to ban PACs?!?
• Actual Audio: Donald Trump might still run!
• Alyona’s Tool Time: Bachmann is a “real person”.
• The Bachmann’s wish you a merry Christmas.
• Young Turks: Why Republicans are losing it over Ron Paul.
• Could Ron Paul destroy the Iowa caucuses?
• Alyona: MSM downplays Ron Paul’s Iowa lead.
• Ron Paul walks out on interview over newsletter questions.
• Red State Update: The Elf Who Liked Ron Paul.
• Young Turks: Ron Paul getting hate from the G.O.P. establishment.
• Ann Telnaes: Newt trims the Judicial branch.
• Actual Audio: Detention without trial now in US law?
  ‘>Newt’s newest campaign ad.
• Young Turks: Meghan McCain on the Callista Gingrich problem
• Sam Seder: Newt to gays, “vote for Obama if you want equal rights.”
• …or did he say that? Here is the video: You decide.

Young Turks: Pat Robertson, “Gays should unacquire their sexuality.

Jonathan Mann: Corporations are not people!

Matthew Thornton III, senior vice president for U.S. operations at FedEx, is thrown into ring as Worst Person in the World.

Lawrence O’Donnell: Top 5 political videos of the year.

Sam Seder: Those kooky racist Texas College Republicans are at it again!

Young Turks: Strange Kim Jon il facts.

Last week’s Friday Night Multimedia Extravaganza can be found here.

Carl mentioned this in the morning open thread, but I though it warranted its own post….

For many years now, the Northwest Progressive Institute (NPI) has been a strong voice in our region’s progressive activist community. One of their early projects was the NPI Portal, a set of tools to connect progressive bloggers and inform progressives.

NPI has now released version 5 of their portal, and it looks to be the best yet. You can read about all the changes here. But my recommendation is that you just go to the NPI Portal front page and check it out. The front page aggregates an incredibly useful amount of information, from news feeds, blogs, campaigns, etc.

There are numerous other cool things that I invite you to explore. I’ll just point out two that caught my attention. The first is a regional blog directory that has blogs organized by cities. It is fun clicking through and learn about what is going on around the Northwest blogosphere. Or…if you are planning a holiday in, say, Idaho Falls, check out the blogging scene in advance.

The Northwest Life page contains a lot of useful information—weather info, alerts, and useful links for anyone living in the Northwest.

Kudos to Andrew Villeneuve and his team at NPI for making a great set of tools even better.

About four years ago, I examined how party identity had changed in both the U.S. and Washington state over a two year period following the mid-term elections. Writing about Washington state in 2007, I pointed out:

We have a somewhat wacky brand of Republicanism here. My impression is that the Washington state Republican party has moved significantly to the right to such an extent that the moderate Republican in Washington state seems like an endangered species.

A graph showing party identity over time, based on SurveyUSA polling data, showed some clear patterns:

Democratic identity had increased slightly from the low thirties to about 35%.

Republican identity had declined somewhat, from about 28% down to at least 25%, and 19% by July 2007.

Since mid-2007, we’ve had economic calamity, the Obama revolution, followed by a Tea Party revolt, and the Occupy movement in response. Unfortunately, SurveyUSA has only published data through August of this year, so we cannot look at changes brought on by the three month old Occupy movement. What we can do is look at a time period similar to my four year old analysis.

What do we see?

Not surprisingly, Democratic identity peaked shortly after Obama’s inauguration—it was in the low 40s in early 2009. Then, for a one year period, Democratic identity dropped to the mid- to low-30s, before a rocky recovery. By July of this year, Democratic identity was in the high 30s, only slightly down from the post-inauguration honeymoon.

In fact, Democratic identity is about where it was four years earlier, in July, 2007.

Republicans show a decline over the same period, from the high-20s just after the inauguration, followed by a gradual (if variable) decline to about 25% by July. Really, the Republican numbers are very similar to July of 2007.

Independent identity has increased from the mid-20% to the high-30%. One reason for this is an increase in the number of people who picked an identity as a “D”, “R”, or “I”, instead of an “other” category or a no-response.

For the first half of 2007, the spread between Democratic identity and Republican identity bounced around 10%, with a huge 18% spike in July. For 2011, the spread for the first half of the year is slightly over 10%.

What does all this mean? Maybe nothing. But it is interesting that we ended the summer in about the same place we were four years ago. There have been no real gains for Democrats or Republicans.

The one big difference we see is that more people chose to identify as independent instead instead of some other category. This might seem important for the many open statewide elections we have in 2012. A lot will probably be made about it. But I don’t think its all that important.

Here is what I think is happening: the increase in “D”, “R”, or “I” identity is an artifact of the top-two primary that was implemented in 2008. It simply reflects a decline in third-party identity. After a couple elections in which third-parties rarely make it to the general election (except, of course, presidential elections) people are less inclined to identify their party as, say, Libertarian, Green, or Reform.

If correct, this hypothesis suggests that the increase in Independent identity isn’t some sort of grand political movement…rather it’s a natural outcome of the top-two primary.

Just how badly has the G.O.P. lost on the payroll tax break issue? Bad enough to lose the Wall Street Journal editorial page opinion like this:

GOP Senate leader Mitch McConnell famously said a year ago that his main task in the 112th Congress was to make sure that President Obama would not be re-elected. Given how he and House Speaker John Boehner have handled the payroll tax debate, we wonder if they might end up re-electing the President before the 2012 campaign even begins in earnest.

The GOP leaders have somehow managed the remarkable feat of being blamed for opposing a one-year extension of a tax holiday that they are surely going to pass. This is no easy double play.

That’s pretty damn bad.

And if that’s one outcome of yesterday’s House Republican fiasco, today’s theater should sting at least as much.

In trying to complete a quick pro forma session of the House today, Speaker Pro Tempore Michael Fitzpatrick (R-PA) walked away while Rep. Steny Hoyer (D-MD) implored the House to take up the bill that would extend the tax break (via ThinkProgress):

Hoyer got a few good slams in on the Republicans before turning the microphone over to Rep. Chris Van Hollen (D-MD). Van Hollen never got a chance. His microphone was cut off, and a few seconds later, the video feed was terminated.

But the issue isn’t just about how Scrooge-like the Republicans have become for the holiday season. The other side of this story is about the collapse of Republican discipline. Speaker Boehner had a revolt among the House masses that forced him to beg-off an agreement he made with the Senate leadership and, in particular, with Senate Minority Leader Mitch McConnell (R-KY) (via Politico):

While the two men have been remarkably united this year, the year-end package has prompted an unusual amount of confusion, disunity, frustration and increased finger-pointing, both publicly and privately, between House Republicans and Senate Republicans over who is at fault in the political fiasco.
[…]

“This is a colossal fumble by the House Republicans,” said a senior Senate GOP aide, requesting anonymity to speak candidly about his own party. “Their inability to recognize a win is costing our party our long-held advantage on the key issue of tax relief. It’s time for Boehner and [House Majority Leader Eric] Cantor to look these rookies in the eye and explain how the game is won or lost.”

For most of the past year, the House Teabaggers have been less of a liability than I figured they would be. But with reelection campaigns on the horizon and a distinct lack of positive accomplishments to their credit, the House Teabaggers are feeling unsettled and maybe even nervous.

Boehner will have increasing difficulty keeping the feral hordes from further trashing the Party.

Please join us tonight for an evening of politics and Hanukkah under the influence at the Seattle Chapter of Drinking liberally.

We meet at the Montlake Ale House, 2307 24th Avenue E. Starting time is 8:00 pm, but some folks will show up earlier for dinner.

Ron Paul:

The rise…

and the fall…

Can’t make it to Seattle? The Tri-Cities chapter of Drinking Liberally meets tonight as well. With 232 chapters of Living Liberally, including twelve in Washington state and six more in Oregon, chances are excellent there’s one near you.

Why did the Supercommittee fail last month? There are two plausible hypotheses:

1. Republicans were unwilling to raise taxes, even on the very wealthy, because of their firm ideology as embodied by their holy pledge to Grover Norquist.
2. Republicans are sabotaging all attempts to get the economy back on track, as a strategy to defeat Obama in 2012.

Until now, it has not been very easy to falsify one or the other. But today we got a definitive answer:

The Republican-led House today rejected a Senate-passed bill that extends a payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits for two months.

The vote was 229-193. The tax cut and unemployment benefits expire on Dec. 31.
[…]

If the benefits expire at the end of the year, 160 million Americans will see a tax increase while about 2.2 million long-term unemployed will see their benefits disappear. Medicare payments to physicians also will drop, raising concerns that doctors will limit their care to seniors.

The House Republicans just raised all of our taxes. That’s a tell!

So, it isn’t about standing firm on ideology, after all. It isn’t about some sacred pledge to Grover. The Republicans are happy to raise taxes if they think it will sabotage Obama’s chances at re-election. In the process, they have been tangibly harming the American economy.

The Republicans have just demonstrated that they are economic terrorists. By putting the welfare of their party ahead of the welfare of America, Republicans have become traitors.

In a play on the holiday season, Rep. Jim McDermott, D-Wash., held up a stocking and a piece of coal on the House floor. “Remember the lump of coal in November of 2012, folks. (Republicans) gave it to you.”

That’s about the mildest response I’ve ever heard for treason. That McDermott…he’s so moderate!

I’ve been quietly concerned that the Republican Primary Entertainment Franchise could peter-out shortly after the 3 Jan. Iowa caucus. I’m just not ready for it to be over yet.

Sarah Palin to the rescue?

In a pre-taped interview set to air tonight on Fox Business Network’s “Follow The Money,” Eric Bolling mentioned to Sarah Palin that people constantly tell him they wish she was running for President.
[…]

“You know, it’s not too late for folks to jump in,” Palin replied. “And I don’t know, you know, it — who knows what will happen in the future?”

So… good news for all those people who bought “Palin 2012″ t-shirts as a joke four years ago; they may soon be wear-able outside of Halloween parties or in ironic neighborhoods of Brooklyn.

Please, oh please, oh please, oh please!

Ask, and ye shall receive! Last Thursday, I gleefully wished out loud for Ron Paul to get his moment in the GOP spotlight:

And how ’bout that Ron Paul at 18%!?! Most of the other nutberger candidates have had their fling with the pole position…Ron Paul should get his shot, too. And to top the whole thing off like a layer of creamy chocolate frosting, we should get Rick Santorum [the] next week.

And looky here:

Newt Gingrich’s campaign is rapidly imploding, and Ron Paul has now taken the lead in Iowa. He’s at 23% to 20% for Mitt Romney, 14% for Gingrich….
[…]

Paul’s ascendancy is a sign that perhaps campaigns do matter at least a little, in a year where there has been a lot of discussion about whether they still do in Iowa. 22% of voters think he’s run the best campaign in the state compared to only 8% for Gingrich and 5% for Romney.

Romney is so unlikable that GOP voters can’t give him credit for running a persistent, reasonably professional, and not overly negative campaign in Iowa?!? Huh.

I’ll sure miss Newt as the front-runner. His reckless quirkiness, monster ego, and his deliciously rich past make him a dream opponent for Obama. Ron Paul makes a dream opponent, as well, but he has zero chance of becoming the Republican nominee. Seriously…if Newt crashes and burns, Mitt Romney is the only plausible alternative, and a lot of Republicans will be holding their noses supporting him.

(Seeing all the nose-holding, Mitt will, no doubt, assume they soiled themselves, throw ’em on the roof of the car, hose them down, and drive boldly onward to the general election.)

Yeah, I’ll miss Newt, for sure. But a Ron Paul win in Iowa has an acute payoff: GOP Mayhem! Don’t believe me? Let’s ask the Washington Examiner’s Timothy Carney, who recalls Pat Buchanan’s 1996 victory in the New Hampshire primary:

“It was awful,” Buchanan told me this week when I asked him about his few days as the nominal GOP front-runner. “They come down on you with both feet.”

The GOP establishment that week rallied to squash Buchanan. Just after New Hampshire, Gingrich’s hand-picked group of GOP leaders, known as the Speaker’s Advisory Group, met with one thing on their minds, according to a contemporaneous Newsweek report: “How to deal with Buchanan.”

No doubt, Ron Paul will be pummeled by his own party. In fact, I wouldn’t put it past them to start first thing Monday morning to head off any threat of a Ron Paul win in Iowa.

The most intriguing possibility out of all this is that Rick Santorum might get a brief stint as the next not-Mitt Romney. That would be awesome for a couple of reasons. First, every time the Republicans rally around a new not-Mitt Romney only to experience an abrupt case of buyer’s remorse, it diminishes the Republican primary process and, in particular, the Romney campaign’s credibility. That’s right…Republicans are engaging in an internal battle that can be described as (if I’m allowed to engage in a bit of hyperbole) mutual assured destruction.

A Santorum rally could also be awesome because of the timing of the Iowa caucuses. If the Republicans take out Paul before the Iowa caucuses, and Santorum hits the wave just right, he could actually take Iowa. And that would be an exquisite New Year’s gift.

I don’t know about you, but I’m just about out…so it’s off to the store tomorrow to stock up on more popcorn.