I honestly didn’t see this coming.

Sen. John Kerry of Massachusetts, the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, endorsed Sen. Barack Obama for the White House Thursday in a timely slap at Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton as well as his own vice presidential running mate.

Quoting a black American hero in endorsing the man who hopes to be the first black president, Kerry declared, “Martin Luther King Jr. said the time is always right to do what is right. And I’m here in South Carolina because this is the right time to share with you, to make sure that we know that I have the confidence … and that Barack Obama can be, will be and should be the next president of the United States.”

Kerry delivered his endorsement in South Carolina at a time, two weeks before that state’s primary, when Clinton is riding a wave of enthusiasm following her victory over Obama in the New Hampshire primary.

The obvious question to ask is “Why?” Why would Kerry endorse Obama over Hillary Clinton, whose husband helped him significantly in 2004; and John Edwards, who was his running mate in 2004.

After Al Gore’s embarrassing pre-implosion endorsement of Howard Dean, it’s obvious that politicians now are going to look before they leap when it comes to making an endorsement. So, one has to ask why Kerry endorsed Obama now, instead of after Iowa. Endorsing Obama immediately following Iowa could have helped him secure victory in New Hampshire — a state Kerry won in 2004. But he didn’t.

Here’s how I see it. Barack Obama, despite the enthusiasm for his campaign, is unelectable in the general election. John Kerry, who didn’t seek the presidency this time despite wanting to, is sure to want one more go at it. Endorsing Barack Obama helps him on a couple fronts… First, he can conceivably give Obama enough of a boost in the primaries to help him win and secure the nomination, and second, he gets to align himself with Obama’s anti-Iraq war position, which he might see as vital for a potential run in 2012. Would Kerry have endorsed Obama if he won New Hampshire? Probably not, it wouldn’t have been necessary. Had Obama won New Hampshire, he’d most certainly have been a shoo-in for the nomination. But now, Kerry sees he needs to do what he can to ensure Obama gets the nomination … if deep in his heart, he really wants to run for president again in 2012.

Polls pretty much predicted the results of last nights GOP primary, but polls were showing another blowout victory for Obama. So, what happened?

A local radio host predicted after Iowa that Obama wouldn’t do as well in New Hampshire. Why? Because New Hampshire had a primary, not a caucus… and in a caucus, the selection process is not secret ballot… Democrats, ever so mindful of race, really, really want to support a black candidate — even though their view of our country tells them that Obama can’t possibly be elected — still, it makes them feel good about themselves to say they are backing the minority candidate, be it during a caucus, or while being polled on the phone… But when push comes to shove, or when it comes to pulling that lever in the privacy of their own voting booth, they are more inclined to vote for the candidate that they think really has a chance to win.

Was that a factor? Or was Hillary’s teary-eyed display actually helpful to getting women to push her back on top?

UPDATE, by Mark Noonan: Richardson is out

UPDATE, by Mark Noonan: Kossacks think that Diebold stole the election for Hillary.

When a liberal group is forced to concede that a Democrat is corrupt, then that Democrat is undeniably up the creek…

It’s on. Predictions… thoughts… reports?

UPDATE:
Mitt Romney, John McCain Both Predicting Wins in Granite State
Obama, McCain Lead in Early (Negligible) NH Voting
GOP’s Thompson in SC instead of NH
NH primary could make, break candidacies
Analysis: NH win could launch McCain

Early returns (7% reporting) shown on Fox show Hillary and Obama neck-and-neck (37 and 36% respectively), and McCain with a good edge over Romney (38 to 28%).

Some early thoughts: If Huckabee comes in a distant third, he loses any momentum he gained in Iowa. If Romney comes in second, especially a close second, he’s still in the race. If McCain holds his early lead and wins by 10 points or so, it could be a two man race between him and Romney again. Ron Paul could defeat Huckabee.

UPDATE: Exit polls via Fox:

McCain: 35%
Romney: 30%
Huckabee: 13%

Obama: 39%
Clinton: 34%
Edwards: 18%

Here are my thoughts if these figures hold out… Hillary is still in the race, and could easily bounce back. Obama may be in a good position with two victories, but I’d have thought his bounce from Iowa would have been bigger.

For Huckabee to go from 1st place in Iowa to 3rd place is not good. He may have jumped in the polls from Iowa, but his inability to at least come in a close second only highlights the fact that his victory in Iowa came courtesy of the Evangelical vote. If Huckabee can only win a primary when there’s a high population of evangelical Christians, than it’s going to be a long primary season and a potential brokered convention.

UPDATE, 8:11 PM ET: Fox projects McCain winner in GOP primary…

UPDATE: Clinton still edging out Obama 40-35% with 13% reporting… Can Hillary win tonight

UPDATE, 8:53 PM ET: Clinton: 40% Obama 34% (23% reporting)

What if Obama loses?

Michael Barone says Hillary could take New Hampshire…

UPDATE, 9:33 PM ET: Revised/updated exit poll:
Clinton: 39%
Obama: 37%
Edwards: 16%

UPDATE, by Mark Noonan: Here’s my insightful commentary – wow!

This is just amazing – and while the talking heads are saying that Edwards is out, I think there is no reason for anyone, on either side, to back out. I’m settling in for a long primary fight.

UPDATE, by Mark Noonan: Fox News is reporting that the Culinary Union out here in Nevada, which was set to endorse Obama, is now holding off. Hillary and Obama are both locked in a tight fight here in Nevada – the Culinary is a massively important union in Nevada. For Democrats, its the brass ring…and if this report is correct, then it would be an indicator that the Democratic power structure has decided that Obama must be stopped. Keep in mind – next up is us in Nevada; our caucuses are on January 19th.

UPDATE, by Mark Noonan: Edwards isn’t backing out…actually says he’s in the race to the convention!

UPDATE, by Matt Margolis: MSNBC projects Hillary win…

UPDATE, by Mark Noonan: Obama puts down the marker – he’s going to end the war in Iraq; he’s letting the left know that he’s their man. This is where the battle lines will be drawn: the left for Obama, the old-line Democratic establishment for Hillary. Who will win? As an aside, Obama says he’s in this to let the people take back their nation – top donors to Obama? People who work in insurance and lobbyists…there’s a big bunch ‘o change, huh?

John J. Pitney Jr., writing at National Review, explains how Barack Obama’s “message of unity” and calls for change are neither new, or genuine.

As I explained on NRO nearly a year ago, Obama is echoing what George W. Bush said in the 2000 campaign. In fact, if Obama’s speeches were term papers, I’d report him for plagiarism. “Our country has unlimited potential. But our politics is broken — at least in Washington,” Bush said in California on October 30, 2000. “You know what’s wrong, Washington is obsessed with scoring points, not solving problems.” In another California swing a month earlier, Bush said: “I’m going to reject the ugly politics of the past, where people felt like they could get ahead by tearing down their opponents.”

One could argue that Bush was merely spouting political pap — but that’s the point. The “unity” message has been old for a long time. Here’s another example:”I saw many signs in this campaign. Some of them were not friendly. Some were very friendly. But the one that touched me the most was — a teenager held up the sign `bring us together.’ And that will be the great objective of this administration, at the outset, to bring the American people together.”

That was Richard Nixon, after his election in 1968.

I suggest you read the whole thing, but the main thing you need to get from it is that anyone can claim to be a uniter, and anyone can claim to be the agent of change. But it’s just rhetoric. Those claims don’t mean anything. As Mark pointed out earlier, Obama’s “change” mantra is meaningless because he hasn’t gone into specifics. He doesn’t go into specifics because his idea of “change” is even more liberal and extreme than even Hillary Clinton’s.

Still, even his idealistic calls for change and unity, and his railing against the status quo and politics as usual are lies. Pitney explains,

Like so many politicians before him, he speaks lofty prose while leaving the wet work to underlings. Eisenhower had Nixon, who later had Agnew. Obama has David Axelrod, among others.

Axelrod has been Obama’s chief political adviser for years. In 2004, Obama defeated millionaire Blair Hull for nomination to the Senate after sordid details of Hull’s divorce came out. Obama didn’t talk about it in public. But according to David Mendell, the reporter who broke the news about the divorce papers, Obama’s campaign “worked aggressively behind the scenes to fuel controversy about Hull’s filings.” And says the New York Times, many in Chicago “believe that Axelrod had an even more significant role — that he leaked the initial story. They note that before signing on with Obama, Axelrod interviewed with Hull.”

So let’s recap. Barack Obama is a senator today because his campaign exploited his opponent’s messy divorce. This is a miracle that qualifies him for secular sainthood.

And should I really have to mention Tony Rezko and other questionable deals/actions by Obama?

Obama is getting through this campaign because of the brand he is presenting. He’s not giving an accurate portrayal of who is, what he’ll do, or where he’ll take our country.

Last night may have been bad for Hillary, but her top donor, Norman Hsu, had a worse day today:

Disgraced political donor Norman Hsu was sentenced Friday to three years in prison after a judge rejected his bid to throw out a 16-year- old fraud conviction.

Hsu’s lawyers had asked Judge Stephen Hall to dismiss his 1992 no- contest plea, arguing that Hsu’s right to a speedy trial was violated because authorities were not actively pursuing him during his years as a fugitive. They could easily have arrested Hsu, his lawyers argued, at one of the fundraisers he hosted in California for prominent local politicians.

Hsu also faces federal fraud charges in New York.

His troubles began dogging Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton and other big- name Democrats last summer when news reports revealed he was a fugitive who fled the state before he was sentenced for the 1992 fraud conviction. He turned himself in on Aug. 31—then fled again.

It happens tonight.

You can follow on the ground citizen reporting of the results via Twitter. I’ve put a feed of the IowaCaucus Twitter in the sidebar to the right.

You are welcome to discuss the results as they come in, and offer your thoughts.

UPDATE 8:55 PM ET: FOX News projects Huckabee the winner of GOP caucus… Still no winner projected for Democrats, but last I saw Edwards was on top and Hillary and Obama were neck and neck behind him.

UPDATE 9:02 PM ET: FOX now shows Obama, Clinton, and Edwards all around 32-33%.

UPDATE 9:29 PM ET: FOX News projects Obama the winner of Democrat caucus with 35%… Edwards and Clinton trail each with 31%. Considering early reports of high turnout for Obama, it appears something happened once Democrats got inside to caucus… Obama may be the winner, but to me, the vote seems close enough that the impact on New Hampshire and beyond may not be huge. Based on early reports, it sounded like Obama was gonna win in a blowout… if the numbers don’t change much from now, then Clinton and Edwards are certainly still able to capture the nomination.

But, it’s not lost for Hillary either… Obama’s victory tonight could make him vulnerable. Dick Morris was saying earlier tonight that Democrats may start to really think about Obama and ask if they want to bank their hopes on him for winning in November.

As for the GOP… Let’s face it, Mitt Romney was the loser tonight, more than Huckabee was the winner. If Huckabee’s victory translates to more victories and stronger victories, then Romney will fall very fast.

UPDATE 10:22 PM ET: Will Hillary scream like Howard Dean? John Edwards just spoke… Does anyone really believe that John Edwards has any real understanding about problems of middle class America? Mr. 400 Dollar Haircut?

UPDATE 10:27 PM ET: Hillary speaks. She sounds hoarse… I’m sure she was screaming her head off earlier… Pushes electability in her speech. Refers to her “national campaign.”

A new Reuters/C-SPAN/Zogby poll released today shows Obama on top, with Edwards trailing by four, and Hillary Clinton back in third in Iowa.

What does this mean? It’s hard to say, Iowa polls have been all over the place, so the only thing we should take from this latest poll is that anything can happen. I’m still thinking that Obama is not going to come out on top, but if he does, it could be fatal to Hillary’s candidacy. If Hillary doesn’t win, she better hope that John Edwards comes in first, because an Edwards victory in Iowa, in my opinion, would hurt her less in New Hampshire. Both Obama and Clinton need to win Iowa to get some momentum over the other. If the perception of electability in the general election is as important to caucus-goers this year as it was in 2004, than I think that helps Edwards more than Hillary or Obama.

As for the GOP, I think Mitt Romney will come out on top. Huckabee may have been surging in the polls recently, but that may not make up for the fact that winning Iowa is a key part of Romney’s strategy and therefore he’s been building up a good operation on the ground that will be hard to overcome. If Romney doesn’t win the Iowa caucuses, he’s in trouble.

As for Huckabee’s surge, I don’t dismiss it, but one can’t ignore that since his surge, he was open to attacks and criticism that he largely avoided previously. He also comes across as less able to handle foreign policy, and he clearly appears to be the easiest GOP candidate for the Democrats to beat in November. If the perception of electability is as important to Republican caucus-goers as it is to Democrat caucus-goers, than John McCain and Mitt Romney should benefit the most… however, if Republican caucus-goers think Romney’s Mormonism will be a problem, than McCain experience the bigger boost.

What will be really interesting to see is McCain’s performance. If he can come in second place, it will be good shot in the arm for his campaign and an indication that the message in his recent ad campaigns have worked.

As of this moment, I’m thinking John Edwards and Mitt Romney will be the winners. The second and third place positions for both parties could go either way…

Good morning and Happy New Year, everyone!

More good news from Iraq.

The Iraqi interior ministry lauded its achievements over the past year on Saturday, saying that 75 percent of Al-Qaeda’s networks in the country had been destroyed in 12 months.

Ministry spokesman Abdul Karim Khalaf also outlined sharp falls in the numbers of assassinations, kidnappings and death squad murders.

He told a news conference that increased patrols along the borders with Saudi Arabia and Syria had slowed infiltration by militants and played a key role in Iraq’s improved security situation.

“We have destroyed 75 percent of Al-Qaeda hide-outs, and we broke up major criminal networks that supported Al-Qaeda in Baghdad,” he said.

“After eliminating safe houses in Anbar province, which used to be Al-Qaeda’s base, we moved into areas surrounding Baghdad and into Diyala province. Al-Qaeda headed north and we are pursuing them,” he said.

Khalaf said kidnappings were down 70 percent and that an average of three to five people killed by death squads were being found each day in Baghdad compared with 15 to 20 a day in February.