Maliki

Boy, Maliki sure seems to be eating his Wheaties lately.

I'm on record as believing that political campaigns matter very little in our political system. Election outcomes are determined by interest groups and demography, the day to day back and forth of the campaign rarely changes anyone's vote, rather it's a sorting process. Even though how most people are going to vote is largely pre-determined, people follow the campaign in order to explain it to themselves.

My favorite example is from the 2004 Vice-President debate. John Edwards congratulated Dick Cheney on how nice and compassionate he was to support his GAY DAUGHTER. While Mary Cheney is an out Lesbian, the rabid homophobic base of the GOP was largely unaware of this. Edwards attempt to showcase Republican hypocrisy was met with horror from the targeted group — how dare that nasty democrat embarrass the Cheneys! Likewise, charges of flip-flopping, of being elitist, of being "old Washington", etc. are all kind of nonsensical if you're trying to honestly figure out who to vote for. But they make perfect sense if you realize that people are just looking for a way to rationally explain their pre-existing tribal identifications.

This weekend's Iraq news, however, is different. Maliki has fundamentally changed the nature of the biggest issue this November. Previously the administration could always count on their control over Iraq to pressure the government into at least silence. Maliki seems to have realized that Bush can't act to get rid of him before our elections, but that he can act to get rid of the Republicans.

Political campaigns don't determine election outcomes — but political issues determine the electoral landscape. After Maliki's remarks, McCain has nothing left to run on.

Now Republicans can spend the next 4 months answering one simple question: If the Iraqis want us to leave, why won't we go?