5:38 pm | Washington DC

Heavy words today on the BWA Campaign Blog. Our apologies for bringing such a harsh trip down on you, alert readers. Just to get our minds back on the horse-race, here are the numbers from Georgia, which is shaping up to be Edward's only chance to knock the wheels of Kerry's bandwagon, or, at least, jar them a bit:

Georgia primary (Zogby)

Kerry: 39%
Edwards: 23%
Sharpton: 9%
Kucinich: 1%

We also received an email this afternoon from our close personal friend, the Rev. Al Sharpton, who indicated to us that he would shortly be exiting the race, and throwing his support to someone at random. No, that didn't really happen. We DO have his autograph on a picture of ourselves, at an office Christmas party. He was in the building. He's thinner than he looks on TV.

Wait, what were we talking about? This cold remedy is kicking in like a crane. No matter. We will persevere.

12:51 pm | Washington DC

Boris Trajkovski Memorial Edition

We are feeling fuzzy-headed this morning at the BWA Campaign Blog. Didn't we post a huge, insightful update last night around 7pm? We were sure we had, but it seems to have gone missing. Also, this morning's mail brought some finger-shaking from our readers, and the political news today seems fretful and disjointed. If the respectable news media won't manufacture a story, the bloggers will.

Gay marriage and Ralph Nader are still the hot topics out there, but we will do our best to keep calm in the face of no real news. One interesting Nader-related fact that has surfaced is that the once-bright crusader may have been angling for a Dean-Nader ticket. The veracity of this claim may be thin, but that would have been a hell of a show.

And in gay marriage news, the New York Times has a piece today on some Republicans who seem uncertain as to the wisdom of amending the Constitution to codify fear and dislike.

And we received this comment from alert reader Cindy Calgaro:

Why all this contempt for our fellow voters? If they're all hateful dumbbutts, what's the point of or living in a pluralistic, democratic society? What's the point of even discussing it, except to clarify one's own feeling of superiority? It's easy to slip into that kind of holier-than-thou argument over a contentious issue, but it doesn't get you anywhere. I don't think that I'm naive or irrationally optimistic to believe that Americans hold the Constitution in high regard -- to me a discussion about that is much more relevant than debating the affect of hate on the next election. I must say, I'm a little concerned that Bears might be falling into this same trap: "Would that the great hooting electorate was as wise and judicious as Mr. Terp believes." Why such low expectations? What happened to "our clear-eyed vision of hope and our shining faith in the beacon that is America."? Were you talking about a literal light house, or the American peoples' hearts and minds?

Ms. Calgaro makes an excellent point. We do have faith in the American people, here at the BWA Campaign Blog, despite our oft-scathing witticisms to the contrary. That's why we think the gay marriage issue will eventually burn the hard right. However, we are also realists, as much as is possible, and students of history. People tend to correct gross injustices over the long haul, but that doesn't mean we can't agitate for faster change in the short run. Richard Nixon, possibly the most-reviled and dishonest person to occupy the Oval Office in modern times, was elected with one of the greatest landslide margins of victory in American history, and left office nine months later in disgrace, impeached and full of bitter vengeful anger. When it comes to electing a president, we have been wrong before. It is the fervent hope of this blog that we are not wrong again.

3:40 pm | Washington DC

We are pleased to learn that our efforts are bearing fruit, here at the BWA Campaign Blog, at least with the British, who have long been our cultural betters, in many ways. Channel 4 News gave us a shout-out today:

Arguably the next US presidential election will be the defining event of the next couple of decades if not the next half-century. It's spawning a lot of interesting blogs - and here's a particularly good one.

They are a learned people, the English.

And the mailbag continues to fill up with outrage and brimstone on the gay marriage issue. Alert reader Jim Terp weighed in tonight:

The gay marriage ban amendment may have popular support, but my sense is that it's probably pretty low on most people's priority lists. It's a bit like trying to sell someone a 1972 El Camino with 357,000 miles by putting an emphasis on the new anti-lock brakes. Well that's great, but the car doesn't run. If the Democrats can continue to hammer Bush on his economic record and remind people that their lives are less secure, the environment is in worse shape, and their prospects bleaker than 4 years ago, I think most people will be able to put the gay marriage issue in perspective.

The bottom line is that Bush is desperate for an issue in the 2004 election. The moon base failed. Steriods in sports did too. Faith based initiatives gave a handful of religious zealots a hard-on, but left most of America unaroused. And Bush/Rove knows if he tries to stake his re-election on something substantive like jobs and the economy, he's going to get hammered. As long as the Democrats stay on message, Bush will remain on the defensive.

Though we respect the wisdom and political acumen of our readers almost beyond measure (not to mention their taste in political blogs), we are disagreeing with them right and left today. Would that the great hooting electorare was as wise and judicious as Mr. Terp believes. While we certainly agree that economic growth and the public policy apparatus designed to support or thwart it is a far more significant issue than gay marriage in real terms, we also know what people get fired up about. Economic policy vs. gay marriage? Foriegn aid structure vs. the Confederate battle flag? Badly, badly-needed Social Security reform vs. abortion rights? You pick the winners.

And, rounding out this evening's offerings, alert and kind-hearted reader Keving Fanning made the following observation:

You've used the phrase "no one cares" in every single post to the election blog. Accident? On purpose? Self-defeating? Self-fulfilling? Who knows.

Hmmm. We must plead guilty to this accusation. We strive to maintain an even-handed and objective tone, here at the BWA Campaign Blog, but sometimes our more sophmoric instincts get the best of us. Irony is cheap, and we will try harder to keep to the high road.

We won't bother to post any numbers for the upcoming Super Tuesday races. With the *possible* exception of Georgia, it's a Kerry sweep all the way.

12:08 pm | Washington DC

Nothing too "hot" swimming up through the brine this morning. Kerry rolled up three more wins in the increasingly-uninteresting Democratic primary race (although Dennis Kucinich provided a brief moment of levity by coming in second in Hawaii). And the nation braces itself along those red-blue lines so loved by the media-industrial complex for the upcoming storm of ruin and trouble over the issue of gay marriage. The Washington Post called it in the air yesterday:

Polls show the nation is split on the question. A Washington Post-ABC News poll released yesterday found that 46 percent of respondents favored an amendment banning gay marriage and 45 percent opposed it. But with the issue of gay marriage heavily in the news, support for such an amendment rose 8 percentage points from a similar poll taken last month.

(We are feeling very warm toward the Post today, having watched 'All the President's Men' again last night.)

Alert reader Jonathan Roth weighed in on this topic last night, sharing his dark and troubling thoughts with the BWA Campaign Blog:

I don't think that the gay marriage issue is as much of a problem for Bush as you say it is. Almost every poll I've seen places opposition to gay marriage at about 60%. If he comes out strongly against gay marriage, even pushing a constitutional amendment, he'll restore confidence with his conservative, christian Republican base, most of whom are a little miffed at the Mexican immigrant amnesty thing. If swing voters bear any resemblance to the poll numbers, than he wins the majority of the swing voters on this one. And he knows he's not going to win any liberal Democrat votes, so why bother appealing to them? Plus, he gets to paint Kerry as a liberal from a state whose Supreme Court ruled in favor of gay marriage.

And, frankly, I believe that Americans *do* like to see reckless hatred, particularly if they feel their values, their morals, the status quo and they themselves are being threatened. Hmmm, it seems I have a pretty dim view of our country's people. Well, no surprise there...

Clearly, Mr. Roth lacks our clear-eyed vision of hope and our shining faith in the beacon that is America. Ye are the light of the world; a city that is set upon a hill cannot be hidden. We are not so different from Ronald Reagan after all, here in the waning days of the empire.

Noted blogger and reputable left-winger Jenny Miller is also tirading on this issue today:

The Great Gay Debate rages on, but not in these parts, where'n we don't take too kindly to hateful bigots. I can't even BELIEVE a Constitutional amendment is up for discussion. But here we are in the trenches and we may as well settle in for a long and excrutiating fight, in which we will be insulted again and again and again. I am trying to keep from just blowing the [heck] up, I'm so outraged at this incredible hypocrisy.

(Editor's note: Foul language in the foregoing remark has been redacted, as we are a family-friendly website.)

And, rounding out the gay marriage topic for the morning, alert reader Kevin Fanning liked this piece by celebrity blogger and noted contrarian Andrew Sullivan.

10:49 am | Washington DC

The President came out swinging this week, calling Kerry a waffler, and going on record this morning in favor of a constitutional ban against gay marriage.

In his speech, Bush called out San Francisco and Boston. While we are mildly interested in seeing what Kerry and Edwards have to say about these statements, we are even MORE interested in seeing how San Francisco mayor Gavin Newsom will react to having his municipal authority challenged directly from the Oval Office.

In other news, Education Secretary Rod Paige called the nation's largest teacher's union a "terrorist organization," Ralph Nader claims that most of his support comes from conservative voters, and there are some primaries today, but no one cares.

2:27 pm | Washington DC

Alert reader Joe Janda sent us his thoughts on the exciting new Nader candidacy:

Nader is either a fool or a genius.

Fool: he runs, but most Dems don't take him seriously, and support Kerry. Pre-vote polls show Kerry leading by 5-10%. Many former Nader supporters think, "Oh, well, since Kerry is leading anyway I'll vote with my principles." There goes the margin, and it's 2000 all over again.

Genius: Nader causes a ruckus and keeps everyone energized and sending money to Kerry. Then he pulls out at the last second.

Somehow I'm not sure he's as shrewd as all that, but I can hope.

Alas, we are not optimistic about Mr. Nader's political shrewdness, or willingness to compromise for the greater good.

And, in the "Farewell to fallen heroes" department, alert reader Cindy Calgaro sent us this excellent web article on the descent of Howard Dean into a fog-shrouded canyon of savagery and defeat, from the viewpoint of the online world. Also today, Dean himself hit the blogosphere to urge Nader to stay on the sidelines, lips tightly pursed in disapproval.

And, finally, this quote from the Wall Street Journal's Lee Gomes (courtesy of Political Wire) warmed our hearts:

"The spread of blogs shows technology's necessity in politics, becoming an alternative-news universe and giving everyone with a Web connection access to gossip once available only to reporters on the press bus."

It would take a nation of millions to hold us back. Tune in tomorrow for more pointless rants about Ralph Nader, hostile screeds against Karl Rove, inexplicable nostalgia for the shouting, redfaced Howard Dean, and possibly some thoughtful discussion of the hoped-for third-party candidacy of the infamous "Ten Commandments" judge, Roy Moore.

11:43 am | Washington DC

Mr. Nader said in an interview that he would seek to get his name as an independent candidate on the ballot in all 50 states. He rejected the notion that he was the spoiler who helped Mr. Bush win in 2000 and would do the same in 2004.

Mr. Nader, who rose to national prominence as a consumer advocate, described his candidacy as an indictment of the weaknesses of the Democratic Party, asserting that it had failed to champion liberal positions and offer a strong alternative to Republicans.

-- The New York Times, Sunday, Feb. 22

Ralph Nader declared his candidacy for the presidency yesterday, a bizarre and quixotic move that has led many to question his basic sanity, and while leading many more to not care at all. 'Fanatical Apathy' today refers to our once-Green hero as "an unhinged and jealous mistress from a bad sex thriller." We are uncertain as to whether or not this will have any effect at all on the general election.

In other news, the Washington Times has an analysis of the political minefield facing Team Bush on the gay marriage issue. See? We knew this spelled trouble for the Republicans.

12:40 am | Washington DC

The shine is off the Democratic primaries now. It's nothing left but a long, hard slog all the way to Boston, with no one caring or paying the slightest bit of attention. We need sex. Drugs. Guns. Sudden and unlooked-for violence. Something to stir the people. Well, never mind.

Several issues came brimming up through the murk this week. The BWA Campaign Blog presents its thoughts:

"I hear the gays are getting together."

It seems to us that the gay marriage issue is one that both parties will want to avoid like an electrical storm. The eventual Democratic nominee won't want to be seen by middle America as associating with "those sorts," and Bush won't want to be seen as casting his lot in with the hellfire and brimstone set. Our thought on this is that, if forced to choose sides in a cultural battle like this, the electorate will, in the end, come down on the side of gay marriage. It's something the average person isn't into, and doesn't understand, but the alternative will be television coverage of those terrible Kansas preachers waving hateful signs at middle-aged lesbians and looking like they'd just as soon bash a drag queen in the head with a rock as let him walk down the street in pumps. No matter how distasteful people find the thought of two men getting married, we think they will find the spectacle of such reckless hate even more upsetting.

However, recent reports have surfaced that make us think perhaps we are mistaken. Apparently, Karl Rove, the malevolent, goat-footed magician who shapes Bush's political image, has let it be known that the president will not just support a Constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, but he will FIGHT for it.

Rove is treacherous and barren-hearted, and behind his eyes there is only madness and deviltry, but he is a master of the game, and if he thinks this is a winning strategy, we are loathe to contradict him.

The Return of Ralph Nader

Nader, we are told, will formally announce his candidacy on 'Meet The Press' tomorrow. We are flummoxed by this.

First of fall, it doesn't even make good sense in a tactical way. He turned down the Green Party nomination, so he'll have to run as an independent. The Green Party isn't big-time, but it's an organization, at least. You can't run for president with no staff, no headquarters, and no people. If he really wanted to go through this nonsense again, why didn't he just run as the Green candidate?

Second, and more importantly, this seems vain and foolish. We count ourselves among those who thought Nader should have bowed out in the waning days of the 2000 election, expressed his disappointment with the Democratic platform, and still thrown his support to Al Gore. At the time, we were quite wrathful.

But now, we can't even muster any serious anger over this. Last time, lots of disenchanted left-of-center voters went for Nader, but this time things are different. Democrats aren't going anywhere this year. Look at the primary exit polling. Lots of people are very seriously down on the president, and are very seriously down with getting rid of him. There's a king-hell fight brewing in the fields, and no one has time to fool around.

Nader fans out there, sound off. We are searching for answers here.

4:32 pm | Washington DC

Alert reader and online web producer Meredith Bragg took umbrage at our "no news" comment. To justify his umbrage he sent us this online discussion he moderated with former Dean campaign manager Joe Trippi.

Unfortunately for Mr. Bragg, Howard Dean is NOT news. What can you show us with Nader in it? How about Wolfowitz?

Speaking of the Washington Post Company and its legions of talentless hacks, we enjoyed this analysis piece by Harold Meyerson on the new "we are kind of left-wing again" platform shift of the Democratic Party.

Also... LET SHARPTON IN THE DEBATES, YOU TAX-FATTENED BLUE-BLOOD JACKALS! Kucinich too, we suppose, although he is less likely to cause a scene.

1:42 pm | Washington DC

Nothing in the mailbag today. No big news in the TV. No "must-read" piece of commentary in the papers. We are in the dog days of the winter, it seems.

We liked this bit by Ron Gunzberger on the end of Howard Dean:

Eight weeks ago, rivals were all jockeying to be seen as the main "Stop Dean" candidate. Ironically -- with a major assist from an unfriendly media -- Howard Dean himself proved to be the main "Stop Dean" candidate in the race.

The current clack is all "Edwards Edwards." We don't know, y'all. What's his thing again? He's a sweetie? Something like that? This election is not going to be the ladybug's picnic. It's going to be a old-school bareknuckle boxing match, and it's going to go 18 rounds. Do the Democrats want a fight or do they want a beating? Dean was the man for that, but he was deemed too wrathful, and somewhat maddened. At least Kerry is proficient in small arms. Are we babbling? We feel like we are babbling.

5:37 pm | Washington DC

Goodbye, Dr. Dean. We will miss your square head, your redfaced rants, your legions of internet geeks, your bluster, your lack of tact, your charming and foolhardy persistence in the face of defeat, your left-wing bent, your cheap suits, and your weird way of hollering on national television when you are upset.

"I know some of you are disappointed … But I also want you to think for a moment how far we have come … the truth is, change is tough. There is enormous institutional pressure in this country against change. There is enormous institutional pressure in Washington against change, in the Democratic Party against change and you have already started to change the Democratic Party and we will not stop."

-- Howard Dean in Burlington, Vermont, Feb. 18, 2004

Okay, that's enough out of us. Tomorrow we will return with more hard-hitting analysis, thought-provoking insights, and foul-tempered diatribes about the treachery of Karl Rove. You know, the usual stuff.

1:22 pm | Washington DC

'Requiem for a Dream' Edition

Fatigue and sadness have laid this web journal low for a few days, and have not yet the heart to return to our duties. Even as we write these words, Howard Dean is addressing his supporters from Burlington, Vermont, formally ending his candidacy for the Democratic nomination. Officially, the BWA Campaign Blog is committed to pragmatism, hard-headedness and detachment, but in truth, we love that man, and we wish he was going to be our president.

They who wait for the Lord shall renew their strength,
they shall mount up with wings like eagles,
they shall run and not be weary,
they shall walk and not faint.
(Isaiah, 40; 28-31)

Take heart, friends and readers. The cause is just as bright.

6:12 pm | Washington DC

We apologize for our seemingly-callous and flippant lack of updates recently. The BWA Campaign Blog national affairs editor was traveling, and since none of our readers ever purchase t-shirts or trucker's hats from this website, we are forced to travel by bus, which makes you zonked out. We are rambling, a bit, here in the foggy afternoon.

Kerry picked up two more primary wins over the weekend, and the sex scandal story seems to have simmered down quite a bit. He appears to be sweeping the board clean. Although Dean has managed to get his numbers up quite a bit in tomorrow's "must-win" Wisconsin primary, he is still well behind his handsome, clean-shaven rival, and, tellingly, has no campaign events scheduled beyond Wednesday. While not surprising, these developments make us somewhat sad.

In the "potentially-divisive news" department, that saucy political gadabout, Ralph Nader, appears close to entering the 2004 campaign as an independent candidate for president.

This issue has come up on this site before, and has proven quite popular with getting people's danders up. Alert reader and Washington resident Sarah Loffman sent us some thoughts on this last week:

I don't really know how I feel about Nader. Most of the time, I feel like he energized folks who weren't going to vote for Bush or Gore. But other times, I hate our "fictitious president" so darn much I'm mad at everybody.

Ms. Loffman also sent us this "Ralph Don't Run" ad.

And here's an op-ed against a Nader candidacy by John Pearce.

And here's Nader's very own campaign site.

And with that, we will sign off for today. They that wait shall renew their strength.

11:59 am | Washington DC

'Love Is In the Air' Edition

Everyone who had their money on Fox News to break the "Kerry sex scandal" story, pay up. The Philadelphia Daily News and Chicago Sun Times beat them to the punch. It's just as well. It was getting surreal on CNN yesterday, what with everyone NOT mentioning it.

Political Wire reports Kerry's reaction (from the 'Imus in the Morning' radio show):

"There's nothing to report. There's nothing to talk about. I'm not worried about it. No, the answer is no." (-- Sen. John Kerry)

Well, maybe this will die on the vine. We apologize for our somewhat heated tone yesterday, regarding this issue. You know how we get.

In other news, Ed Gillespie, head of the Republican National Committee, accused Kerry of planning the "dirtiest campaign in modern presidential politics." It seems that the gloves are off all around.

Alert reader Amanda Cardone sent us this Joe Conason piece on the Kerry scandal. Is this story a throwback to the "bad old days" when the media dug up endless rumors of sinful and wicked behavior, asks Conason. Did those days end? We did not get the memo.

And alert reader Cheryl Huber sent us this chart from Mother Jones magazine, comparing the wartime services of Kerry and President George W. Bush. We hesitate to pile on, on this issue, as we suspect we would have been unhappy about going to war as well. However, as we are descended from public-school teachers, rural mechanics and Campbell's Soup salesmen, it is unlikely we would have ended up in the Texas Air National Guard anyway.

7:22 pm | Washington DC

The major media are still circling warily around the Kerry scandal story, eyeing it hungrily, nostrils flared, bristling, waiting for the first member of the pack to lunge in and pull a shred of warm flesh from the hind leg... Who was behind it? Who talked? Was it Lehane? The Clark campaign? Was Hillary involved in this vicious mess? We are inclined to suspect Karl Rove when we scent foul deeds done under the cover of the vile night, but this does him no good. Unless they have something on Edwards, and this is all a ploy to get Dean nominated. Are they that clever? Are there black-masked thugs creeping through the alleys of Burlington even now with suitcases full of cash and Mexican poison and terrible, damning photographs?

...

What is wrong with us? Why would we write such demented things? It has been a long day, easily-confused readers, a long and trying day. We hope the senator is holding up better than we are under pressure.

Washington resident and alert reader Jonathan Roth wrote to share his high-minded thinking with this web journal:

Personally, I'm ecstatic that the "respectable" media haven't jumped on that Drudge story yet. Drudge's journalistic integrity is laughable, and any media outlet thinking of running that story better do their own investigation and make sure they can come to the same conclusion independently of anything that hack says.

But I've got $10 that says that Fox News is the first one to run with it. Maybe that's too easy, though. Perhaps there should be some sort of spread involved in that bet.

Alert reader, and Long Islander, Joe Janda expressed his confusion that the Drudge Report mentioned Wesley Clark's statement that the intern story would cause the Kery campaign to "implode," yet the good general endorsed Kerry today. Alas, the good Mr. Janda has missed the black-nailed, killing-joke undercurrent. If, as some speculation holds, it was the Clark campaign that threw the knife, what better way to roll suspicion than to turn around and shake hands in public? Black waters, faltering readers. We are knee-deep in black waters.

Mr. Janda also asked our opinion on the hardest-working man in the bottom-feeder business:

What's the BWA line, is Drudge a hardline scandal hawk or is he a GOP tool on Rove's payroll?

We would be mightily surprised if Drudge turned out to be an overt tool of the scheming, treacherous Rove. He is a footpad, and a shadow-creeper. Blunt instruments like Drudge are not his sort of weapons. Still, while we believe Drudge to be a cheap and bloodless hack, we cannot but admit that the media pack follows his bloody lead like dogs when these things surface. After all, none of us read any of this in the New York Times.

To return to today's other, less-violent topic, alert reader and Brooklyn resident Cheryl Huber (who apparently sympathizes with the deviant) shared her thoughts on this article from the Village Voice on Kerry's gay marriage stance:

This little clip is interesting in a variety of ways.
1. Kerry's wambly stance on gay marriage
2. Eerie parallel language used by Kerry to discuss gay marriage and Clinton to discuss getting blown by interns...

We appreciate Ms. Huber's thoughts, as well as her use of the word "wambly." We also agree with her that the following sentence is the highlight of the piece:

Everything from sports teams to the bastions of patriarchy must be renegotiated when the status of faggots rises.

That's all we can take, here in the trenches. The network glamour boys and high-priced wire-men are all keeping clear of the mess for now, but here in blogland we are all pressing valiantly on. It's a blogger's market these days. Your name is written on the dark wall in letters of red fire, CBS. The end draws nigh...

3:29 pm | Washington DC

The Kerry scandal (see earlier post) continues to make enormous waves in the blogosphere, as every hack with a computer uploads whatever crazed gibberish comes into their heads. Yet the respectable media remains silent. Alert reader and media expert Meredith Bragg shared his thoughts with us:

The problem is the major news outlets want to talk about it, but have to pretend the emperor has no story. Newsrooms around the country are holding closed door meetings -- I guarantee you.

But who will crack first? Fox News? Crossfire? Howard Kurtz? We'll take odds on whatever you've got. Inside Politics in on CNN as we type these words, but Judy Woodruff took a pass. She's a classy dame.

In other news, columnist Bob Novak took his beating-stick to the White House political team today over Bush's tediously-infamous appearance on 'Meet The Press' and the gay marriage issue. For our money, both the BWA Campaign Blog and several of our more thoughtful readers think old man Novak is wrong on this one (see yesterday's posts), although it seems strange to be in agreement with the likes of Karl Rove.

Speaking of Bob Novak, we were recently re-reading some of our favorite political journalism classics from the 1972 presidential campaign (Hunter Thompson's 'Fear and Loathing on the Campaign Trail' and Timothy's Crouse's j-school classic 'The Boys on the Bus') and we ran across a quote from Lyndon Johnson, drunkenly addressing a young Bob Novak:

"You know what the problem with you is, Bob. I like YOU, but you don't like ME."

An outstanding capsule description of the great, surly Novak from one of our more comically-dishonest presidents. Stay tuned for more pointless gibberish.

12:56 pm | Washington DC

Things turned harsh and ugly today in the primary races. Here at the BWA Campaign Blog we were just thinking of drumming up some emails by discussing the possibility of a Nader candidacy, which is always a good topic to get the left-leaning electorate huffed up. That will have to wait, however, as the the blogosphere is all zerked out by today's Drudge Report, which claims that the news media have been secretly investigating some sort of murky rumor involving Kerry and a young woman.

For those of you that missed the story, Drudge is reporting the following:

Intrigue surrounds a woman who recently fled the country, reportedly at the prodding of Kerry, the DRUDGE REPORT has learned.

A serious investigation of the woman and the nature of her relationship with Sen. John Kerry has been underway at TIME magazine, ABC NEWS, the WASHINGTON POST, THE HILL and the ASSOCIATED PRESS, where the woman in question once worked.

The political world has yet to fully react to this tawdry, yet strangely unsurprising development. Here at the BWA Campaign, we suspect that, whatever else this means, it will make for a more interesting primary season, and as fans of superficial, horse-race politics, we secretly applaud this development. Or perhaps we are saddened by the inevitable dark underbelly of the American Dream. Either way, we await the hammer-rain of commentary that is sure to come, as well as the thoughts of our and readers.

5:22 pm | Washington DC

A few items appearing in the BWA Campaign Blog mailbag this afternoon. Although refusing to accept the sad news until he hears it from the general's mouth, former Clark volunteer Jim Terp wrote in to sing the praises of his fallen hero:

Good job General--wasting my vote, my donation, and my volunteer hours!! Seriously, I had a great time working with the Clark presidential campaign, and have some hope for his future in the Democratic party. Still, this is Kerry's hour, and his campaign appears to have positioned itself well for a run against Bush (replete with such catchy, oft-repeated mantras like "Benedict Arnold CEOs," "The People NOT the Powerful" and "I know three words that Bush will understand: BRING ---- IT ---- ON!"). Pass the bong, please.

We are uncertain as to what that "bong" reference might mean. Some sort of stoner thing, no doubt.

And alert reader Jenny Miller was actually somewhat heartened to hear of Bush's rumored support of a constitutional amendment banning gay marriage, hoping this portends a self-inflicted political wound for the right:

I don't think gay hatin' can save them this time. We'll see....it's going to be a helluva 9 months if they plan on making this their big issue...

We agree with Ms. Miller, more or less. If the left refrains from excessive dramatics, the issue will go in their favor. If the right refrains from excessive hate-mongering, it may go in theirs. The American public prefers, above all else, for things to stay the same, and the boat to remain level, but they also hate to feel mean-spirited. It's like the Clinton impeachment brouhaha. No one was all that jazzed that the president was getting humjobs from interns in a closet off the Oval Office, but they found the regressive political Neanderthalism of Bubba's congressional foes a little too stone-hateful to identify with. Also, the civil libertarians should abandon the Republicans in droves on this one, being rather protective of the Constitution. The Bible Belt Right is powerful in some circles, but they can't carry something this heavy on their own. We await the inevitable op-ed pieces.

1:05 pm | Washington DC

Reports surfacing in the media today have the sick, iron taste of fear and treachery. That can mean only one thing...

:: ROVE WATCH ::

With his president facing a hostile and seemingly endless series of question about the war in Iraq (not to mention his once-again-controversial stint with the Texas Air National Guard), White House minister of disinformation Karl Rove has apparently settled upon a new issue to shift the focus of the vast, muddle-headed electorate. A constitutional amendment banning gay marriage seems like just the thing.

We have not yet seen Rove's name in print in connection with this issue, but it smells of hate and manipulation, and when those scents come drifting out of the White House we always hear his goat-like footfalls not far behind.

In other news, the Washington Post features the following Howard Dean quote today:

"I do not recommend drinking urine ... but if you drink water straight from the river, you have a greater chance of getting an infection than you do if you drink urine"

Apparently our man Dean said this to a crowd of Wisconsin middle-schoolers. Yes, that's right. He told them they should drink urine, instead of river water. He's running for the presidency.

10:42 am | Washington DC

'Requiem for a General' Edition.

General Wesley Clark exits the presidential race today, disheartened by his sinking poll numbers, his increasing lack of relevancy, tepid voter support, general malaise, miserable weather, indifference and bad table manners throughout the southland. The New Republic's Ryan Lizza offers a glimpse of the good general's final days:

Clark says he has finally figured out that the [TV crews] only film him now just in case he dies. "They call it the death watch," he says. "She's taking those pictures to see if I'm going to have a heart attack while I'm talking to you. It's nothing that I'm saying that's particularly interesting. She's heard it all a dozen times. She just wants to see if I go, ohhhh, ahhhh." Clark holds his hands to his chest, stiffens his body, feigns a heart attack, and lets out a sound that recalls Howard Dean on election night.

At least his sense of humor is still intact. Godspeed, sir.

5:20 pm | Washington DC

The better-sort-of-Southerners have spoken, handing Kerry the win we all expected. Early exit poll numbers from the National Review:

Tennessee: Kerry 46, Edwards 28, Clark 15, Dean 7
Virginia: Kerry 48, Edwards 25, Clark 11, Dean 8

Apparently Jon Roth's vote wasn't enough to stem the tide.

Expect the respectable news media to leave off their unseemly mauling of Dean's still-twitching body and immediately begin pulling at Clark's trouser leg. (Daily Kos speculates that the good general is not long for this world). Edwards will still get a pass, because he is such a good sport.

And across the aisle, so to speak, the White House press corps, traditionally a surly pack of boozers and hangers-on, scented blood in the water today, and brutally savaged press secretary Scott McClellan on the issue of the president's wartime National Guard service.

1:40 pm | Washington DC

Virginia and Tennessee go to the polls today, to futher cement Kerry's unstoppable lead, although we are personally hoping that both Dean and Edwards stay in the race all the way to July, and give us a king-hell old-school convention in Boston.

Speaking of Dean, and the Old Dominion, alert reader and Virginia resident Jon Roth took advantage of the commonwealth's open primary voting (Virginia does not have party registration) to cast his ballot for Howard Dean:

Also, isn't this whole "open primary" thing a little messed up? Basically, anyone in the state can vote in the Democratic primary, whether they're a Democrat or not. Which means that a whole lot of organized Republicans could cast votes in the democratic primary for the weakest candidate. Not that it would really sabotage the nomination on a national level, but still. How about this ... maybe a whole lot of organized Republicans will get together and vote for Dean (since they all seem to think he'd get crushed in the general election), and he'll end up winning the state! Okay, that would be a hollow victory, but a win's a win!

Or we could all sneak into the Pentagon and flush all the toilets at the same time. Man, we'd be shot in a heartbeat.

5:24 pm | Washington DC

Another slow afternoon here at the BWA Campaign Blog. On the downside, nothing in the mailbag today. On the plus side, our ill-advised remarks regarding Karl Rove (see earlier post from today) have not yet resulted in our untimely demise from a series of sharp blows to the head and neck, delivered by unseen men in black dusters and heavy boots.

Our favorite political moment of the current news-cycle was the clip of former Democratic standard-bearer Al Gore shouting angrily, Howard-Dean-style, at a crowd of party faithful last night in Nashville. Gore made the usual polite remarks, then spun madly into a wild tirade, calling the President a traitor and a liar, and comparing him to the still-feared and reviled Richard M. Nixon. It was a delightful, unsettling spectacle, and we encourage you to watch CNN until you catch it.

Nominee-to-be John Kerry wins today's BWA Campaign Blog *Gold Star*, which we are giving out these days to any candidate who makes an appearance in Roanoke, Virginia, a stalwart bastion of the best of America, and also our hometown.

And speaking of the commonwealth of Virginia, tomorrow is another brick in the inevitable wall, as Virginia and Tennessee primary voters go to the polls to further cement Kerry's lead:

Zogby polls

Virginia: Kerry 47, Edwards 24, Clark 11, Dean 10
Tennessee: Kerry 45, Edwards 21, Clark 19, Dean 5

AMG polls

Tennessee: Kerry 32, Edwards 21, Clark 20
Virginia: Kerry 35, Edwards 22, Clark 17
Wisconsin: Kerry 41, Clark 15, Edwards 10, Dean 9

It looks like Kerry's "Southern strategy" is just "Win." Clever, Mr. Senator. Very clever.

It's a shame the nomination fight is ending only a scant handful of weeks after it began. We find Clark to be pointless, Edwards to be strangely unaffecting, and Dean to be de-energized, sad, and terminal, but we would like to see a little more fire down the line. Still, the outlook is better than it has been in months, with the media treating Bush like the gutless hack he is, various ugly truths about the Iraq war rearing their unwelcome heads, and his approval numbers dropping as much as 10 points in the last month or so. We feel better about November already.

10:48 am | Washington DC

A fast-paced, gut-churning weekend for the Democrats, as Kerry scores a northern trifecta, leaving the increasingly irrevelant and brutalized Howard Dean gasping for air and grinning a hollow, beaten grin as he talks cheerfully about the upcoming Wisconsin primary. We still have our "Howard Dean in 2004" button on our bag, and it will stay there until he falters and fails, and the last telephone connection is torn from the walls in Burlington, but we were saddened to see our man, demoralized and shaken, subjected to a barrage of humiliating questions from Wolf Blitzer on Sunday. Leave the man be, you vultures.

After a pair of second-place finishes in Washington and Michigan that might have meant something two weeks ago, Dean also dropped the ball in Maine yesterday:

Maine: Early Returns (AP)

Kerry: 48%
Dean: 25%
Kucinich: 14

These numbers are from last night, so they may have shifted somewhat this morning. Three cheers for Dennis Kucinich, who actually picked up some delegates for a change. We'll see you in Boston, kids!

Meanwhile, infighting is fierce in our very own backyard, as Clark and Edwards settle down into an increasingly-savage contest for Tennesee and Virginia, who go to the polls on Tuesday. One of these two will face the reaper-man very soon, leaving the other as the only real challenger to Kerry's otherwise-unstoppable ride (assuming Dean's "Last Stand in Cheeseland" Wisconsin strategy goes as poorly as everything else he's tried for three weeks). The smart money is on Edwards, but the smart money is often lost.

:: ROVE WATCH ::

Today we begin a new feature here at the BWA Campaign Blog. As a public service, we will do our level best to keep an eye on George W. Bush's nefarious minister of propaganda, the doughy, evil-tongued, stone-hearted Karl Rove. We undertake this task fully aware that it may result in our death at the hands of Rove's shadowy operatives, who are known to employ poisonous South American watersnakes, as well as less-savory methods of silencing their foes. But no matter. Know the truth, and the truth shall set you free.

This inaugural installment of Rove Watch actually begins on a positive note, as first lady Laura Bush fires a harsh and unsubtle broadside against her husband's most vile and treacherous courtier in the pages of the New York Times on Saturday:

"[Laura Bush] characterized Karl Rove, her husband's chief political adviser, as not as powerful as "the chattering class" believes.

"I would say his role is definitely overstated, but he probably loves it," she said, smiling. "He's very happy to have his role overstated."

Strong words from the First Lady. We hope this unwise gesture does not result in the death of her beloved Welsh terrier, Knuckles, from a rare and terrible throat-poison, but that hope may be a vain one. Watch this space for further updates.

6:12 pm | Washington DC

The polls are closing in Michigan and Washington, although final results are not expected until tonight. Still, early returns suggest that John Kerry's recent habit of beating the other candidates like they took something continues unabated, with the AP referring to his lead in the Washington race as "commanding." It is worth noting that this state was once considered a "firewall" by the Dean campaign.

Washington: Early Returns (AP)

Kerry: 50%
Dean: 29%

We are unable to get our hands on any numbers from Michigan, but we suspect the hammer-rain is falling there as well. Maybe Edwards and Clark can arm-wrestle for the vice-presidency. Actually, with the Dean campaign reduced to its current storm-wracked mess, Clark's presence in the race has become entirely superfluous. His "I'm the anti-Dean" candidacy made sense when the doc was on top of the world, but he can't compete with Kerry in virtually anything. Combat veteran? Check. Southern appeal? We have John Edwards for that, and he is handsomer. Policy experience? We have lots. You have none at all. Just what are they putting in the water down in Oklahoma?

Weirdly enough, Dean has been making some noises about accepting a vice-presidential slot, were it offered to him. We are having trouble fitting this concept easily into our minds. We are fond of ex-governor Dean, more so than the rest of the Democrat's current thieves' gallery, but he is not exactly back-ticket material.

No, we suspect a Kerry-Edwards ticket coming out of the Boston convention, which, we remind our easily-flustered readers, is in late July. What are we supposed to do until then? How can the primaries be over by February 7th? This is all McAuliffe's fault, that crocodile. Why get everyone all wound up and then have them sit on their hands for 5 months? There are more important things in life (and politics) than money, you goat-hearted swindler. Think of the children.

Well, we are not masochists, here at the BWA Campaign Blog. We will not be monitoring CNN for primary returns this evening, or, at least, not monitoring it closely. Perhaps we will check it once, and then turn away, a single tear on our cheek caught by the hard arc of the clip-light. At any rate, with the exception of our faltering hero, Howard Dean, the whole gang is in Richmond tonight, for a big to-do ahead of the Virginia primary. Perhaps some name-calling will result. Anything to generate some interest in the downer trip this primary season is turning into.

Also, while we have knocked General Clark around a little in today's post, he is our favorite candidate of the day, as he made an early morning appearance at a biscuit joint in Roanoke, Virginia, which holds the distinction of being our hometown.

5:55 pm | Washington DC

The political directors for the Dean and Kerry campaigns were both on Crossfire this afternoon. When asked if the two would consider sharing the ticket, both guys said yes immediately. One assumes that Kerry would be at the top of that bill. But still. The "I can beat Bush AND I was in the war" respectability of John Kerry with the Wrestlemania energy of Howard Dean. I would SO line up for that show.

Speaking of Kerry beating his rivals like cheap gongs, here's the current numbers for the Washington and Wisconsin races:

Washington Primary (Stuart Elway/The Oregonian)

Kerry: 40%
Dean: 13%

Wisconsin Primary (University of Wisconsin)

Kerry: 35%
Clark: 11%
Edwards: 9%
Dean: 8%

So much for Dean's "Last Stand in Cheeseland."

We are looking forward to this weekend, not because we have exciting social plans, but because we are a nerd. Primary races in Maine, Washington and Michigan, and George W. Bush appears on Meet the Press. Send Tim Russert your question for the president. And say a little prayer for the Dean campaign, if that's your kind of thing. He's come so far, and been knocked down so often.

2:46 pm | Washington DC

Last week our hottest topic here at the BWA Campaign Blog was "pragmatism," of which today's topic of "electability" is merely a mutant offshoot. In light of this, we INSIST you read this opinion piece by Michael Kinsley, partly because it addresses these very issues, but motsly because it made us laugh out loud:

Some Democrats cheated and looked into their hearts, where they found Howard Dean. But he was so appealing that he scared them. This is no moment to vote for a guy just because he inspires you, they thought. If he inspires me, there must be something wrong with him. So Democrats looked around and rediscovered John Kerry. He'd been there all along, inspiring almost no one. You're not going to find John Kerry inspiring unless you're married to him or he literally saved your life. Obviously neither of those is a strategy that can be rolled out on a national level.

We also heard from celebrity blogger Jenny Miller, who has been hot under the collar for several days now about CBS's decision to air Superbowl ads featuring lowbrow sophmoric gibberish, but banning political advocacy ads as too "controversial". Apparently the nation is best served by being spoon-fed ignoble crap, rather than being forced to think, even for 30 seconds, about something real. Thank you, Les Moonves.

11:36 am | Washington DC

It's a grim and joyless day out there on the campaign trail, with our man Dean going savagely for Kerry's legs in a last-ditch Hail-Mary play in the north, while Edwards and Clark attempt to outdo one another in homespun southern colloquilisms right here in Virginia.

Dean's desperation-play fundraising efforts netted him close to a million dollars in the last couple days, but the numbers are not heartening, with Kerry up to big leads in Wisconsin and Michigan. In fact, Kerry is leading in every primary race for the next week, as far as we are aware, leaving the rest of the Democratic contenders broke, heart-sick, and surrounded by what we imagine to be increasingly bored and booze-maddened press hacks. Good news for John Kerry, but it certainly takes the excitement out of things. We are displeased, here at the BWA Campaign Blog, as we enjoy democracy as a spectator sport. Even as we type these words, the once-proud Dick Gephardt is standing on a packed stage in Michigan, singing Kerry's praises to a cheering union throng.

This brings us back to the topic of electability, which is all the rage these days. A John Harris and Mike Allen piece in today's Washington Post (called a "must-read" by ABC's The Note, a far more prestigious blog than our own, we must admit) addresses that very topic. And yesterday's posting here of a David Broder column discussing the primary's effect of squeezing out the less "mainstream" candidates in all directions prompted alert reader Chris Walker (an Indiana resident and noted left-leaning academic), to share the following:

I would like to submit a link to a political reading for your page. I believe the fifty-five-year-old words of a scientist, whose work of which your readers may be familiar, are of urgent contemporary importance given the neoliberal global economic policy stands of the, in David Broder's words, "mainstream candidates" for the democratic nomination.

And, speaking of electability, alert reader Meredith Bragg brought our attention to this Village Voice article, dissecting what many have remarked upon as an unholy alliance between the Reverend Al Sharpton and a known Republican operative. This would qualify as something more than a mere curiosity, had our close personal friend, the good Reverend, managed to pick up enough delegates to make him a force to be reckoned with at the convention, but as things stand, he couldn't even beat Kerry and Edwards for the black vote in South Carolina after spending three weeks there doing nothing but singing hymns and raising hell.

And, rounding out today's "All Over the Map" edition, BWA reader and liberal firebrand Jim Terp seized upon some of our recent link updates to send his thoughts to the White House:

Thanks for posting the links to presidential candidate's websites. I was so moved by G.W.'s in particular that I felt compelled to write the following to BushCheney04@GeorgeWBush.com:

"I commend you on an excellent website! I was particular impressed with the article by Pete Domenici regarding "Help for Unhealthy Forests". It's about time that major logging interests were able to have their voice heard on a major presidential candidate's website! The story "Derek supports President Bush . . ." also really tugged at my heart strings. I had my doubts about whether Bush would get Derek Tam's endorsement, but now that he has it, I figure why even bother holding an election in 2004? It's kind of pointless now isn't it?"

"By the way, any chance that you could get some articles posted on steriod in sports or the mission to the Moon on your homepage? I found those issues to be very compelling -- frankly I find the fact that 2.3 to 3 million jobs in the U.S. have been lost in 3 years is really boring. And who cares about 500 dead in Iraq, or the 2,000 plus dead during 9-11-2001? Having lost a good friend in the Tower II of the World Trade Center in 2001, I'm absolutely sure that he would want a president who placed steriods in sports and a mission to the Moon among his top agenda items--especially, if such efforts were paid for by folks in the middle income brackets. Isn't that what America is all about anyway--putting the tax burden on the back of America's middle class? I figure the top 2% have earned their right to be lazy. G.W. especially. His record in private industry is second to none."

"Finally, it's great to see that so much special interest money is being put to good use. No one kisses big business ass like you guys! Keep up the great work!"

We have no doubt that Big Jim will shortly be receiving a thoughtfully-worded response from the president, or, perhaps, a vengeful stomach-biting from Dick Cheney's prize-winning Irish wolfhounds.

5:36 pm | Washington DC

Following the advice of alert reader (and closet Republican) Meredith Bragg, we here at the BWA Campaign Blog will make a greater attempt to link to the political readings we (or our readers) find stirring in some fashion. To get things off to a reasonably non-controversial start, we enjoyed David Broder's column in today's Washington Post, in which he examines the "winnowing" process the Democratic candidates have been going through as the voters toss out the ones with less moderate stances on major issues (like political support for business interests vs. labor interests). Of course, we almost always enjoy David Broder's work. He is a smart old guy.

We have also updated our links to include candidate websites. To be honest, we find them somewhat useless, but we respect the concept of freeing the vast, thick-headed electorate from the self-interest filter of the news media. Of course, that doesn't exactly apply to us, as we are a blog.

11:27 am | Washington DC

The dull haze that had fallen on the insular world of media and politics yesterday came down like a shroud this morning, as the Democrats lurched back into the harness for a long weekend of hard pulling, and George Tenet went down to Georgetown to shovel a vile and ruinous heap of trouble through the front door of the White House. We applaud Tenet's cheap treachery, and fervently hope it will revive the flagging spirits of the Dean campaign.

Speaking of which, this email arrived this morning from Howard Dean to his faithful:

The entire race has come down to this: we must win Wisconsin.

We will get a boost this weekend in Washington, Michigan and Maine, but our true test will be the Wisconsin primary. A win there will carry us to the big states of March 2 -- and narrow the field to two candidates. Anything less will put us out of this race.

We are heartened by these words. Our man Dean may be ill-tempered and square-headed, but he is nobody's fool. We assume this bold effort means that the campaign's internal tracking numbers are good enough to start throwing ultimatums around. Either that, or the man from Vermont is sticking to his guns and going down with the ship.

We suspect it may be the latter. The numbers from Michigan are not uplifting:

Michigan Primary (Detroit News)

Kerry: 56%
Dean: 9%
Edwards: 7%
Clark: 3%

Michigan Primary (Zogby)

Kerry: 47%
Dean: 10%
Edwards: 8%
Clark: 4%

Well, they're not uplifting unless you're a Kerry supporter. Which we'll all be soon enough.

In other news, alert reader (and New Orleans resident) Jacob Wascalus sent us this email today:

I've found evidence that Bears Will Attack has snagged the attention of a huge publication. The editors of Newsweek (February 9, 2004--"We Were All Wrong") published a remark, in my opinion, that indicates they must be observing the online discourse you've been posting. The Conventional Wisdom column has this to say about Dean: "The Perfect Train Wreck: Betrays his core by firing Trippi and hiring lobbyist as campaign manager. Blog that." Blog that? Blog that!

We are humbled by such praise, here at the BWA Campaign Blog. As you were.

4:06 pm | Washington DC

The rats are deserting in droves. No offense to either deserters or rats. Celebrity blogger (and former Dean stalwart) Jenny Miller turned in her "The Doctor is In" button today:

I've already leapt from the sinking Dean boat, right into the arms of salty Navy hero John Kerry. Bring the buoyant John Edwards aboard, and we've got ourselves a ticket to be reckoned with. I am fickle and often wrong. But when we consider what is at stake: the prospect of Republican domination in all three branches of federal goverrnment, a filibuster and veto proof Congress, as the Democrats are likely to lose four seats in the Senate, President Bush, his judicial appointments, the gerrymandering of districts - kids, if we don't beat this guy, we are in BIG TROUBLE for a LONG TIME. I am prone to hyperbole and general panicking, but if we lose it could be the end of any hint of democracy as we learnt it.

But here at the national affairs desk of the BWA Campaign Blog, we are as of yet undaunted. For some rays of hope, see our post earlier today, or read Dean campaign manager Roy Neel's "How We Will Still Win" manifesto.

2:23 pm | Washington DC

We have been keeping an eye out for some numbers on this weekend's races, but no luck so far. If anyone out there runs across any, send them our way.

In the "Things Are Looking Up" Department (and in keeping with our new "big tent"-spirit attempts to gracefully let go of our still-burning hopes for a Dean-Feingold ticket in November), we present the following American Research Group poll on the continuing decline of George W. Bush's approval ratings:

Bush Job Approval Ratings (AMG)
Job performance overall: 47% Approve, 47% Disapprove
Job performance on the economy: 42% Approve, 54% Disapprove

What was it that James Carville used to say about this sort of thing? Hmmm...

9:56 am | Washington DC

The savage cane-beating of Howard Dean by John Kerry turned out to be a reality last night. We think maybe 200 people voted for Dean across seven states. It hardened our hearts, it must be admitted, and we spent a long time sitting in front of CNN with political savant Jenny Miller, watching Kerry gravely address a hooting throng in Seattle and carefully picking things we liked about him.

It seems to us now, in the harsh light of unwelcome truth, that the Democratic primary voters may be onto something. Kerry is sort of like Al Gore, but, one hopes without the irritating mannerisms that seemingly doomed his candidacy. Unlike The Incredible Smirking President, it is hard to imagine anything but an expression of near-constipated seriousness on Kerry's face. Plus, he used to play bass for a rock band called 'The Electras'.

It may seem to our readers that these newly-kind thoughts on the junior senator from Massachussetts mean that we have abandoned our shouting, redfaced hero, Howard Dean. True, thoughts of leaving him crossed our mind as we watched the delegate count rise for Kerry, as we watched Dean finish no better than third in any state, and no better than fifth in many of them, as we watched the ever-cheerful, gnomelike Joe Lieberman bow out of the race for good, having done better than Dean in several states, and STILL admitting hopeless, stomach-clenching, unshakeable defeat. But hope is a thing with feathers, alert readers, and we still believe, because we are blind and foolish.

Our thinking is as follows.

It was a night of rural states, for the most part, and most of them, Missouri and Delaware aside, will not go to the eventual Democratic nominee anyway. Dean's people, thick-headed and bright-eyed as they have been lately, managed a good expectations game, to the point where no one expected him to win anything, but still not do anything as drastic as drop out. Still, it would have made for some good headlines if he'd managed to get ANY VOTES AT ALL. No matter. The national press corps is a savage pack of blood-mad jackals, but they love a good narrative hook. As much as they enjoyed the "destruction of the Dean campaign" storyline, they are waiting with bated breath to write the "triumphant return of Dean" stories. Edwards and Clark do not interest them. It is Dean they want in the fight. If he builds it, they will come. All he has to build is a good-sized handful of real wins. Virginia and Tennessee are foregone conclusions, unless Al Gore has been secretly working on some sort of steam-powered light mill that will run the streetlights in downtown Nashville for a year, but if he can get Maine, Washington state and Wisconsin (fairly left-leaning northern states, as these things go), he can get his square head back on some magazine covers and give Kerry a half-cocked run for the money.

It should be noted that there is a better than 75% chance that this is merely wishful thinking on our part.

2:50 pm | Washington DC

Early exit poll numbers are surfacing. Things look bleak for Clark. They also look bleak for Dean and Lieberman, but we knew that. These are from the National Review:

Missouri: Kerry 52, Edwards 23, Dean 10

South Carolina: Edwards 44, Kerry 30, Sharpton 10

Oklahoma: Edwards 31, Kerry 29, Clark 28

Delaware: Kerry 47, Dean 14, Lieberman 11, Edwards 11

Arizona: Kerry 46, Clark 24, Dean 13

Just when we were starting to come around to the thought of Kerry as the nominee, we have to deal with Edwards possibly winning two primaries. We need to lie down for a while.

1:36 pm | Washington DC

Today's tracking polls actually aren't wobbling as much as they were last week in New Hampshire. Kerry seems to be up just about everywhere, although Edwards is leading in South Carolina and Clark is leading in Oklahoma. None of the numbers have Dean up anywhere, but his people apparently made some noises about winning New Mexico. That will impress everyone. No offense to our New Mexican readers out there. 26 delegates is nothing to sneeze at.

Meanwhile, Joe Lieberman campaigns hard for victory in Delaware. He is a brave and bright-eyed little man. We anxiously await tonight's results.

10:20 am | Washington DC

Today's the big day. Hundreds of delegates up for grabs, and all of them twitching in the near-grasp of Kerry's vote machine. Our prognostications on these sorts of things have been so off lately as to be laughable, so we are making a desperate lunge for credibility by refraining from making any sort of predictions. Instead we will merely arch our brow in a knowing fashion as the tracking polls jerk back and forth.

One poll that interests us shows numbers in a hypothetical match-up between the president and his likely Democratic challengers.

General Election numbers (CNN/Gallup)

Kerry vs. Bush
Kerry: 53%
Bush: 46%

Edwards vs. Bush
Edwards: 49%
Bush: 48%

Dean vs. Bush
Bush: 52%
Dean: 45%

Clark vs. Bush
Bush: 50%
Clark: 47%

So Dean appears to be the Democrat least likely to defeat Bush in November. Which, given the BWA Campaign Blog's consistent support for Dean, makes us less pragmatic than we have claimed in recent posts. In fact, it make make us true-believers, utterly unsuited to comment on political matters, fit only to wave poorly-lettered placards at the tinted windows of expensive sedans as they cruise past us through sliding gates and armed men. This saddens us.

Well, if our man Dean can't turn things around by the Wisconsin primary, we may have to leave him, like so many faithless, weak-hearted others. We're sorry, Howard. You were always the one.

1:56 pm | Washington DC

Not much in the BWA Campaign Blog mailbag today. Nothing at all, in fact. Our readers, like the rest of the politically literate, are waiting for the results of Tuesday's "Rumble in the West." We are hoping it's not the savage cane-beating of Howard Dean by John Kerry that it is currently shaping up to be, but our hopes are based on nothing but white ash and fading memories of a square-jawed man shouting at Iowa caucus-goers in the dead of night.

The one piece of good news that came our way today was yet another poll showing promising results in a hypothetical match-up between Kerry and George Bush in the general election:

Hypothetical General Election Race (Quinnipiac University)

Kerry: 51%
Bush: 43%

So that's good news, anyway. Although it seems somewhat suspect to us. Also, raise your hand if you've ever heard of Quinnipiac University.