zlacker

I'm surprised to see this at No. 1, too.

"President Obama" (if that happens) is perhaps a transcendent enough event to make it here, but not a caucus victory speech.

FWIW, a better synthesis of politics & technology is Michael Bloomberg's take on the results http://cityroom.blogs.nytimes.com/2008/01/04/bloomberg-parse... particularly this comment about all the major candidates:

"I don't want to disparage anything, but let me say this: If you have complex problems, there probably are no simple cost-free solutions to them, because if there were, somebody would have solved them ... You know, the people running for office always say: 'I don't want to bring that up now. If I do, I won't get elected. But if I don't mention it and get elected, then I can do the difficult stuff.'"

>>dpapat+(OP)
I love how Bloomberg is setting up his campaign ahead of time by teasing the news about maybe running. I'm really hoping he jumps in as a third candidate after the primaries and puts his personal fortune to use.

Not sure why, I just kind of like the guy. He seems like a problem solver and not a publicity solver.

>>Xichek+s
We'll know soon enough: by law, he has to file in February if he runs.

Based on his performance in NYC, I think he'd make a great President: he's willing to tackle problems, and he's got a rare combination of intelligence, pragmatism, and competence.

>>dpapat+B
As I read it (here: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/22445078/), he can't even file as an independent until March 5, when Texas starts it's independent nomination process. He has to basically petition each state to be on the ballot.

If that is the case, he has a whole month after Super Tuesday (Feb 5, 2008, when 20 states have primaries and the winners will most likely become inevitable on both sides) to decide whether to run.

Last night's victories are actually good for him. His dream situation would be any of the top three dems vs Huckabee... since this would leave a very wide middle ground for him to vacuum up.