I almost missed this one. Shudder the thought.
Adam Nagourney's piece in today's New York Times takes a look at how presidential candidates are announcing their intentions earlier and earlier in their race for the White House:http://www.nytimes.com/2006/12/27/us/politics/27edwards.html?hp&ex=1167282000&amp;en=bd648d5a748388ad&ei=5094&partner=homepage
It's a throw-away "I can't believe I'm working the week between Christmas and New Years" puff piece (Nogourney, a man who I wish I could call even a distant acquaintance of mine but cannot because he would deny it, is one of the best political journalists in the business. But I think even he would admit its been a slow week).
However, buried at the end of the piece was this WHOPPER:
"There may be a few stop-the-presses surprises lurking out there. There is still a smidgen of doubt about the candidacy of Mr. Obama, who is spending the week in Hawaii with his family discussing his future, and even a small smidgen of doubt about Mr. Clinton.""Smidgen of doubt"?
Nagourney is a head-cheerleader for the Gang of 500. When people talk about "conventional wisdom" they are talking about "what Adam held forth about at last Tuesday's cocktail party off Foxhall Lane".
Up until this morning, conventional wisdom held that Hillary and Obama were already off and running.
Does Adam know something we don't?
I'm guessing yes, but I'll bet he doesn't even know what he knows yet.
I just can't see the Democratic Party letting Hillary and Obama get in: http://greenmountainpolitics1.blogspot.com/2006/12/why-john-edwards-should-be-democratic.html