I just started my daily blog reading, but I already know this is the best thing I'm going to see. Marc Ambinder:
Before Obamaiania in Iowa, Sen. Clinton stood at 39% in the New Hampshire polls.
Last night, she finished at 39%.Clinton is the best political example of an efficiently priced security.
There is so much information about her in the marketplace; there is absolute liquidity.
Obamania comes along and messes up the equilibrium.
It is restored a few days later.
What's so pitch perfect about this explanation is that it nails the meta-explanation without any need to examine the details. We don't know precisely what happened on the ground, but whatever it was, it returned the situation to equilibrium. I had always hoped that the time between Iowa and NH was short enough that Obama could ride the momentum to a quick finish, a best-case scenario that really was never more than a long-shot.
But with time to absorb last night's close finish, I can't help but wonder if this isn't actually for the best, both for the party and for his campaign. An early finish to the primary season would essentially shut the campaign down until the late-summer. That's dangerous in any circumstance, but in Obama's case it might have been fatal. He's building a 50-state movement, something that's far more difficult than running a traditional campaign. The earlier the campaign shuts down, the fewer states he'll compete in. And its the competition that is helping to energize the electorate. Without it, I have a hard time imagining that so many people would choose to become so deeply involved so early.
Am I spinning gold from yarn here? Perhaps. But that doesn't mean that the point doesn't still stand.
UPDATE: Lest you think that the first half of this is some sort of nod to the perfection of markets, consider this. The Intrade futures markets are following the public, not leading them. They aren't predicting, but reacting. Why? Because the futures market is made up of a tiny, tiny subset of the public, and a very non-representative one at that. They may or may not have special wisdom, but they almost certainly have special biases.
Subscribe to this blog's feed
