The Architect Weighs In

From the WSJ we have Karl Rove's "New Rules For Politics," which includes some old rules he believes are proving true as well.

Perhaps most interesting is Rove's analysis of the new media landscape:

-Television ads don't matter as much as they used to. Going on the air with the earliest and most ads doesn't count for nearly as much as it once did. Campaigning this time has been so intense, long and geared toward retail politics that people -- especially in the early states -- form opinions that are difficult to alter by early and voluminous advertising. Mr. Romney, who spent $2.4 million on TV ads in Iowa beginning last February, found that out.

Voters are discounting advertising. They may be blocking out ads, relying more on personal exposure, information from social networks, alternative information sources like talk radio and the Internet, and local media coverage. By Feb. 5, when it costs $16 million to burn one television spot in every state that's voting, it's simply too expensive to be on air everywhere at once.

The 20th century's closing decades saw the rise of the TV ad man as the most potent operator in presidential campaigns. The 21st century's opening decade is seeing the rise of the communications director and press spokesman as the more important figures on a campaign staff. It is the age of the Internet, cable TV, YouTube, multiple news cycles in one day, and the need for really instantaneous response. Ads and ad makers are still vital -- but not nearly as much as they were just a few years ago.

It's certainly the case that more people are hearing more things about politicians through more ways than ever. By "things" of course I mean documented facts, rumours, complete fabrications, what have you. Rove is describing a changed battlefield wherein yesterday's big Death Star weapon may be too slow and cumbersome to fend off a swarm of attacking sticks and stones coming from every direction, 24/7. Perhaps big TV ad buys will be most effective in injecting attacks into the media bloodstream (otherwise known as -- close your ears, children -- "negative ads"), rather than playing defense or for soft-focus, "meet the candidate" introductory spots.

The End of 9/11 Politics?

Politico has an interesting -- and depressing -- piece suggesting that "Rudy Giuliani's distant third-place finish in Florida may put an end to his bid for president, and it seems also to mark the beginning of the end of a period in Republican politics that began on Sept. 11, 2001."

Giuliani's national celebrity was based on his steady, comforting appearance in Americans' living rooms amid the terrorist attacks, and his campaign for president never found a message beyond that moment. The emotional connection he forged that day, it seems, has proved politically worthless. After months of wonder that the former mayor seemed to have no ceiling to his support, he turned out to have no floor, trading fourth-place finishes with Ron Paul, a little-known Texas congressman. "There's a paradox for Rudy," said former Nebraska Sen. Bob Kerrey, who was a member of the 9/11 Commission. "One of the things he did very well on 9/11 was say, 'We've got to get back to normal.' And that's what's happened. We've gotten back to normal."

[...]

After growing accustomed to tapping into fears of terrorism and faith in Republican strength, Giuliani's failure will force a major shift in Republican campaigns, some GOP strategists said. "Between the trauma of 9/11 and the civil war we had over the present policy in the Gulf — people have reached a point where they're just exhausted by it. I think that's a terrible, terrible thing," said Rick Wilson, a Florida-based GOP adman who produced perhaps the iconic post-9/11 television ad: Saxby Chambliss' searing attack on the willingness of Democratic Sen. Max Cleland, a Vietnam War hero, to keep America safe — a spot illustrated with the visages of Osama bin Laden and Saddam Hussein. "Americans want to watch 'America's Top Model' — and they really, really don't want to be reminded that bad people want to kill them," said Wilson, who worked for Giuliani's 2000 Senate campaign and advised him informally this year. "Talking about 9/11 now is like 'Remember the Maine.'"

And Now They've Come For Your Printer

According to Information Week, "spammers have a new way to vex computer users: printer hijacking."

Building on the concept of cross-site scripting, whereby an attacker can
inject malicious code in Web pages viewed by others, security researcher Aaron
Weaver has demonstrated how an attacker can inject spam messages into a Web site visitor's printer.

Weaver's research is available in a paper published online. It describes
how the attack could be initiated by creating a hidden iframe -- a block of code
inserted into a Web page and often served from a different domain than the Web
page -- and a Web form that submits the spam message to the printer. An attacker
could also send the spam message as a fax, if the printer has fax capabilities.

"The end result is that by visiting a Web site on the Internet you could
end up sending printer spam to your printer without even knowing that anything
happened," Weaver explains in his paper. "Since most printers don't have any
security set, it is possible to print anything, control the printer, change the
print settings, and even send faxes."

Oh, good grief.

Your Primary Source

Time has a terrific map of all the primaries across the country, with dates, delegates, etc.

Meet the New Inevitability

Putting Hillary's NH victory in perspective, Chris Cillizza of the Washington Post writes:

Crowds swelled at Obama events throughout New Hampshire and a sense of
inevitability seeped into the media coverage of the Democratic race.

That would be the sense of inevitability that inevitably replaced the sense of inevitability that surrounded the Clinton campaign all last year.

Bill's Moment

"You should make a conscious decision for words over deeds, for a feeling over the fact of change," Clinton said early this afternoon. "It's your country, you can do whatever you want, you own it ... You can make a judgment and it's your country, but don't go into this thing thinking there are no judgments and there's no decision to make."

So said Bill Clinton to New Hampshire crowds after Obama's win in Iowa, according to this Salon piece on Bill's "passive-agressive" pitch.

You gotta think this is Bill Clinton's moment, at least in his mind. (I know, it's always Bill's moment in his mind, but I mean more than usual.) Hillary's Iowa debacle endangers both of their futures. Now he finds himself making what might be the final big play of their partnership in New Hampshire. It was there in 1992 that the self-proclaimed "Comeback Kid" escaped the first trap he set for himself to blow up on the national level -- Gennifer Flowers. With Hillary Wynette playing her role on "60 Minutes," Bill managed to come in second behind Paul Tsongas, and all the elements of the Clinton psychodrama America was to witness for years to come were in place.

A big part of this drama has been Bill's vaunted ability to connect with people, one on one and in crowds, which established something strong enough to overcome whatever people felt about his personal shortcomings. It oddly echoed what most people assumed held their marriage together: some kind of agreement that their partnership was more important than their marriage vows.

But Bill is not on the ballot this time, and his aura may not be enough to save Hillary's candidacy. And now the undisputed master of the politics of feelings is reduced to begging people to use their heads and ignore that fuzzy feeling they get from Obama.

I feel his pain.

Iowa

I was wondering if the candidates could attend the Iowa carcasses, and the AP has the answer:

Iowans rendered their judgments in meetings at 1,781 precincts from Adel to Zwingle, in schools, firehouses and community centers where the candidates themselves could not follow.

Some hard numbers, as of late Thursday night:

• Projections estimated that 220,588 Democrats showed up on a cold midwinter's night, shattering the previous mark of 124,000. Turnout was also up on the Republican side, where projections showed about 114,000 people taking part. The last previous contested Republican caucuses in 2000 drew 87,666 participants.
  
  
• Obama also outpolled Clinton among women, and benefited from a surge in first-time caucus-goers. More than half of those who participated said they had never been to a caucus before, and Obama won the backing of roughly 40 percent of them. Edwards did best among veteran caucus-goers, garnering 30 percent of their vote. Obama and Clinton each got about a quarter of their support.
  
  
• An AP analysis of Iowa's Republican caucuses estimated that Huckabee would win 30 delegates to the national convention and Romney would win 7.
  Obama's victory was much narrower in the race for delegates. The AP analysis estimated Obama would win 16 delegates, compared to 15 for Clinton and 14 for Edwards. Clinton will win more delegates than Edwards, despite getting fewer votes, because of Iowa's complicated caucus system.
  
  
• In the overall race for the nomination, Clinton leads with 175 delegates, including superdelegates, followed by Obama with 75 and Edwards with 46.

And this interesting item:

Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio publicly urged his backers to line up with Obama on a second round, and two Democrats said aides to New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson did likewise as the caucuses unfolded.