When Romney wins Florida it's...over? Beginning? In the middle?

First things first, Romney, as you'll see below, seems to be well-headed to victory in Florida on Tuesday:

As of Friday, his surge and Gingrich's drop were plateauing, but at levels that leave Romney 8+ percent ahead. With about 9% undecided, almost all of them would have to break for Gingrich for him to regain the lead, and given his uneven performance in Friday's debate, that doesn't seem likely. The latest models at fivethirtyeight.com are also forecasting a Romney victory of 8.5%.

So what will this probable victory mean? Just 11 days ago, when I was expecting Florida to mark four Romney victories out of four, I thought it would mean the end of the race. Then Gingrich surged, Perry dropped out and Santorum retroactively became the victor in Iowa, causing me to recant just before South Carolina. Romney has rallied in Florida, getting muscular with attacks, clearing up his hedging on financial disclosure, and drawing in the establishment, who were suddenly panicked by Gingrich's resurgence. Will a Romney Florida win knock Gingrich out and once again point us toward a quick sew up?

I think there are some reasons to be skeptical. For one thing, Santorum is just about out of money, and it's not clear how a Florida third place that barely clears 10% would help him. Which leaves us with some interesting math:

If you look at the votes so far for the seven Republican candidates that started out in Iowa, a few things stand out:

1. Elimination has been fairly rational, in the sense that everyone who only garnered single didgits is now gone.

2. If you are Gingrich, you're so close to Romney overall so far that only an ultra-shellacking in Florida would convince you that you have no chance long term.

3. Assuming that all Huntsman votes would have gone to Romney if Huntsman hadn't been in the race, and assuming that some, but not all of the conservative votes (I've taken 75% of totals for Bachmann, Gingrich, Perry and Santorum) would have gone to a single Conservative candidate if there was only one in the race, the hypothetical Conservative would lead Romney so far. If you assume even more Conservative overlap, and/or less than 100% Huntsman conversion to Romney, the Conservative would lead by even more.

4. Bachmann and Perry are gone, and Santorum is running out of money. Gingrich is, effectively, the only remaining figure Conservatives dissatisfied with Romney will have to flock to after Florida.

The schedule between Florida and Super Tuesday on March 6th gives Gingrich several chances to steal a surprise victory or two and rally those still looking for an alternative to Romney, keeping things interesting until Super Tuesday on March 6th.

Sat., February 4, 2012	Nevada
February 4–11, 2012	Maine
Tue., February 7, 2012	Colorado
	Minnesota
	Missouri
Tue., February 28, 2012	Arizona
	Michigan
Sat., March 3, 2012	Washington

On the skeptical toward my skepticism side of the coin, it's a heck of a lot of time, and a heck of a lot of geography to cover, for a candidate as underfunded and understaffed as Gingrich. It's also worth noting that Gingrich's best chance is probably in the arch-Conservative Arizona, but they don't vote for four weeks after Florida. And the lightning rod issue there is immigration, just about the only issue in existence on which he is actually to the left of Romney. 

It will be interesting to see it all play out... 

Book Review: The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym

The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym of Nantucket (Edgar Allen Poe, 1838, 146 pp.)


When I got the Nook for Christmas and set about using my Barnes & Noble gift cards to download things to it, one of the first things I discovered was the joy of works that are beyond copyright protection. 99 cents can get you a lot, and if (as I would recommend) you spring for the extra few dollars to get to the $2.99-$4.99 category to get collections that have proper indexing for E-readers, you can find yourself with the entire works of William Shakespeare, Dostoyevsky or H.P. Lovecraft for under five dollars each. And, in this case, Edgar Allen Poe as well.

When I downloaded a collection of his stories, I discovered that it also included The Narrative of Arthur Gordon Pym, the only novel he ever wrote. Having just finished it, I can testify that it is a gem, albeit a somewhat baffling one. What starts off as an adventure at sea story, and then takes a decidedly Poeian turn to cannibalism, becomes a fantasy of Antarctic exploration that then ends without an ending. Poe didn't die in the middle. Publishers didn't pressure him to finish it. He quite deliberately ends with a mysterious final scene, and then writes an afterword explaining how the last few chapters (since it's written as a memoir that has been "discovered" by Poe) have been lost.

While this is consternating, it does produce a curious effect of mystery and wonder that I, and apparently many other readers, ended up appreciating. The language is a delight, as is the always self-obsessed narration of the main character as he stumbles through fantastical scenes of stowing away, mutiny, shipwreck, starvation and sailing ever southward through increasingly strange realms.

One of the things that I found most interesting in reading about it after reading it, is the profound effect this strange little unfinished book has had on other writers. I'd known that H.P. Lovecraft was influenced by it and makes repeated references to it in his Antarctic novel At The Mountains of Madness. In addition to that, though, it appears to have been a major, uncredited, influence on Herman Melville in writing Moby Dick, was admired and translated by Baudelaire, and also inspired loosely-related sequels by Jules Verne and another 19th century writer, Charles Romyn Dake. More recently the book inspired critiques of its racial depictions by Toni Morrison, which themselves became the jumping-off point of Mat Johnson's satirical 2011 novel Pym, in which an African-American literature professor becomes obsessed with finding the inhabitants of the islands described toward the end of Poe's novel.

I myself found the depictions of the "savages" in the book to be troubling in their early-19th century way. Perhaps it's my own post-modernity talking, but I wondered along the way if Poe wasn't slightly tongue in cheek about it. The narrator believes they're guilty of a brutal massacre, but there are subtle indications throughout the work that the narrator himself is somewhat incompetent and not entirely reliable in his recollections. Are the signs that he sees of what he believes is a deliberately set-up ambush actually totally misinterpreted? One of several interesting questions to consider while reading...       

South Carolina: This changes...Something!

Not in the long run, but still something.

Last week, I was thoroughly convinced that today's primary in South Carolina would produce a clear victory for Romney, setting him up for a win in Florida and de facto ending the Republican nomination contest by the end of the month. Well, I'm a big enough Blogger to admit when I'm (partially) wrong. To wit, view the latest polling average from Real Clear Politics over the last three days:

As you can see, going in to the home stretch, Gingrich is in the lead, has upward momentum, and Romney, which is even worse for his chances today, has downward momentum. The model at the eminently respectable FiveThirtyEight.com is forecasting a Gingrich victory of around 38-30.

What happened? Gingrich has had some clear pluses this week: momentum from a strong debate performance Monday, Perry dropping out and endorsing him (which I did not foresee), and another strong showing on Friday night. He also had some pretty clear minuses in the last few days: Santorum's endorsement by the Evangelical establishment, Santorum's belated recognition as the victor in Iowa, and a decidedly unflattering interview with his ex-wife on national television Thursday night.

The pluses seem to be outweighing the minuses. Goes to show you what I know! I also realize that I made a fundamental error in my mathematical noodlings from last week in only considering reallocation of votes among candidates and not the additional factor that there were about 10% undecided who might break Gingrich's way as well. Even so, I wouldn't have called it, since I thought Perry would hang in there, and in addition to the votes from Perry, Santorum and undecideds going to Gingrich, Romney has been dropping the last few days.

Color me contrite! And, to clarify my above statement that I was partially wrong, I am probably, in fact, going to be completely wrong in my short term predictions from last week. If Gingrich wins today and Santorum is fourth, Florida becomes a real contest. And if Santorum is fourth there as well, Gingrich has an excellent chance of being the last Conservative standing and pulling in enough resources from that status to hang in there for many primaries and caucuses to come. As most everyone notes, Romney retains every advantage over the medium/long term. In that sense the "inevitable Romney" theory is probably still correct. But this could at least keep it interesting through Super Tuesday!

And it also has some bearing on Romney's ultimate prospects, as the longer the competitive race, the more focus on him seems to be eroding his favorability rating. Everyone pulls together for their nominee eventually, of course, but enthusiasm matters, as does the opposition seeing what avenues of attack are likely to be most fruitful. Those of us who still believe in civility should put up the blast shields, because this fall could get nasty on both sides...            

South Carolina update: This Changes...Nothing

Mind you, there are a few things afoot that could affect this Saturday's primary in South Carolina. Such as the fact that everybody else in the field finally realized Romney is about to walk away with it, and targeted him relentlessly in last night's debate. Not to mention which, they are spending heavily in the state with advertising that focuses on him, rather than each other. Santorum certainly got a boost when the evangelical conference this past weekend decided he was their last best hope for a conservative alternative to Romney, and backed him with surprising unanimity. Meanwhile, in the pro-Romeny camp, Hunstman has decided to drop out and back Romney.

The net effect of all of this? Just about nothing. To see why, you have to look no further than the latest Real Clear Politics averages for South Carolina:

Gingrich is not getting any upward trajectory for all his spending, but neither is he dropping. Santorum has similarly plateaued after a weak New Hampshire showing. The state is friendly to them, but they both have limitations in field strength, and are competing with each other for the same votes. Perry is meanwhile making his last stand, but clearly not getting any traction out of it, and any hope he held onto that evangelicals would rally around him is clearly dashed after this weekend. Santorum could get some boost from the evangelical backing, but no recent poll has him closer than 15 points behind Romney, and that's way too much to make up in 5 days, especially with Gingrich and Perry continuing to unroll their remaining advertising riches. And the considerable anti-Romeny advertising money that has been floating around is meanwhile largely focused on attacks on his business record that have actually caused conservatives to come to his defense, rather than on the social issues where he is much more vulnerable.

All of this combines to pretty much hold in place the following math, which you can see above:

Romney+Huntsman=37.3%
Gingrich=22%
Santorum & Paul=14.3% each
Perry=5.5%

Hypothetical united Conservative would win, narrowly, about 41%-37%, but neither Gingrich or Santorum will get that high unless almost all of the other's votes plus Perry's flow to them in the next five days. Which, absent a candidacy-ending scandal, isn't going to happen. Meanwhile, Perry has insisted he'll stay in through Florida, and Santorum and Gingrich have already spent so much money ahead in the state that they'll be heavily tempted to as well no matter how South Carolina turns out. Which makes it very likely that another split field will hand Romney four in a row.

Book reviews: Glasshouse, The Writers Journey

Glasshouse (Charles Stross, Ace, 2006, 352 pp.) 
Yes, that's right, you're getting two reviews for the price of one today. Having finished both books in the past week, I thought it would be nice to combine and expedite. Glasshouse was actually the final book of my Sci-Fi book club in San Francisco before I moved eastward. I don't think they ever formally met to review it, but heck, I'll give my review now:

Great! Disquieting in a good way. A little rushed at the end.

Without sacrificing my strong anti-spoiler stand, I can tell you that most of the book involves a character from a post-human future participating in a re-created simulation of late 20th/early 21st century life. This results in multiple opportunities to see our society from the outside, and appreciate how strange and even absurd some everyday things that we take for granted are. I think this is one of the highest functions sci-fi can serve. An additional layer of disquiet is provided by the fact that our narrator is someone who has undergone extensive self-induced memory restructuring (a kind of brain engineering not uncommon in this future). The result is that throughout, they can't be quite sure who they were before the experiment, just what they're doing there, and even which of their memories are real versus manufactured. This creates a feeling of being trapped inside a feeling of being trapped that is used to good dramatic purpose throughout.

About my only criticism is that the denouement feels very rushed. Things happen in 10 pages that easily could (and should) have been developed over 30-50 pages. I can't hold a grudge though. As a writer, I can testify that endings are hard, and this book remains well worth the time of anyone who enjoys contemplating just what "self" is and how we use memory to construct it.          

The Writers Journey: Mythic Structure for Writers (Christopher Vogler, Michael Wiese Productions, 3rd. Edition, 2007, 407 pp.)

Speaking of being a writer, this is a GREAT book on writing and story structure. It's written specifically with reference to film, Vogler being a professional story consultant for the movie industry, but the principles that he covers are applicable to stories of all kinds. Inherently so, since what he's done is drawn upon the stages of the Hero's Journey as originally written about by student of Carl Jung and mythologist extraordinaire Joseph Campbell.

Vogler uses the character archetypes and structures of myth repeatedly found worldwide, and shows how they're employed in film as a way of teaching what makes a story work. Hence the use of a monster in the photo above to highlight the mythic aspects of the book.  

The Writers Journey was recommended to me by my friend Robert Evans of my former San Francisco writing group. Just as he promised, it proved very helpful with the screenplay that I'm currently working on. Besides which, it was delightful fun seeing examples of how universals of story structure and character development can be found in films ranging from The Wizard of Oz and The Lion King through Ordinary People and Pulp Fiction. Along the way, I gained a grudging admiration for Titanic, a strong desire to see more John Wayne movies, and even an interest in re-watching Beverly Hills Cop. Giving birth to that last wish is surely a feat that only a great writer could have accomplished!       

New Hampshire wrap-up: It's over.

I'm going to answer my own question from yesterday, based on last night's results. The Republican nomination contest is essentially decided.

Bold words after just two states? Consider the results of the candidates placement from last night:

Romney- Got more votes than he did in 2008, got a higher percentage than McCain won by in that same year, and was not far away from 20% ahead of the next comer. If anybody got positive momentum for South Carolina last night, it was him. Yes, SC is not a good state for him, and Perry and Gingrich are both sitting on millions in advertising they can unleash against him over the next ten days. But you'll see below why I think it won't matter.

Paul- Strong second last night, following up on a strong third in Iowa. South Carolina will be a little harder for him, but he's probably in a position to keep getting double digit seconds and thirds in many states to come, if he chooses to stay in. But is unlikely to ever do better than that.

Huntsman- I actually like him a lot, but then as a Progressive I would, for the same reasons in reverse that Joe Lieberman used to be the Conservative's favorite Democrat. It doesn't matter, because New Hampshire is probably the only state until maybe Utah that he can score double-digits in, and it's only a matter of time until money and/or a sense of futility forces him out.

Gingrich- Squeaking ahead of Santroum isn't a bad result for him, but being fourth isn't a good one either. What this not-bad-enough-to-knock-either-one-out result really means is that they'll both be in through South Carolina, along with Perry. Which means that Romeny, who would probably lose the state by 10-15% against a united Conservative candidate, will win it.

Santorum- Fifth ain't great, and his Iowa momentum is now officially tapped out. Nearly tied with Gingrich, though, means he'll be alive and kicking in South Carolina. It's possible one of them will decisively pull ahead of the other there, leading one to drop out. More likely, they split the conservative vote pretty evenly, and are both encouraged enough to stay in through Florida at the end of the month, dividing the vote there and delivering that state to Romney as well.

Perry- Skipped New Hampshire to make his last stand in South Carolina. The problem with doing that, of course, is that people write you off after two single-digit performances in a row. Presumably he'll give up the ghost after three in a row.

The upshot of all of the above? By the end of this month, Romney will have won the first four contests. The field will effectively be winnowed down to him, Paul and whoever the last Conservative standing is. Yes, technically it will take him a while to officially pile up the delegates needed. And some opponent will probably score a surprise victory or scarily-close second here and there. But the early division of the field will have gotten him enough ahead that nobody will be in a position to catch him. Finis.

New Hampshire: This is the end! Or not.

In a few hours now, we'll be seeing the results roll in from the New Hampshire primary. In my case, I'll probably be on a news website by 8 PM refreshing live results every 15 minutes. Because that's just the way I am... For the record, here's what the latest polling is showing:

The statistical model over at fivethirtyeight.com is pretty much in line with this too. Astute cases are being made, like this one from Politico.com, that tonight's result will essentially mean that the nominating contest is over for the Republicans, since a strong win in NH will position Romney for a sweep of South Carolina and Florida too. Of course, you can find a contrarian view at the very same news site, which just goes to show that hope for an interesting primary season springs eternal.

My take? I have to side with the sweep theory. Even in the debates this weekend, most of the candidates still focused on bashing each other in pursuit of second (and third) place rather than targeting Romney in pursuit of first. Perry's decision to stay in through South Carolina and the fact that however they finish tonight, Santorum and Gingrich will be around for that contest too practically guarantees that Romney wins South Carolina, however underwhelmingly. And the fact is, you can't second or third place your way to winning the nomination, but you absolutely can get there through a string of underwhelming first place finishes.

I can still make a case for some interest tonight though. Romney is so thoroughly expected to win, and win big, that he has the most to lose. Finishing 20% ahead of the next comer could just get him an "as expected", but having someone get closer than that and/or finishing first, but with the same 31% share he had in 2008, will probably be counted against him. And that would make South Carolina tougher, to be sure.

The thing is, nobody else is likely to walk out of tonight with good enough news. If Gingrich can get ahead of Santorum into fourth place he does himself some favors, but fourth is still pretty far back. If Santorum can get into the top three, that would be something, but third is still third. Ron Paul is expected to get second, so anything else would be bad for him, but he's the kind of candidate who can keep going regardless. And no matter how they place, they'll all be in South Carolina for the next 10 days, carving up the vote there so thoroughly that Romney can comfortably win even with only 25-30%.

Huntsman is the only candidate having last-minute momentum, and it isn't impossible that he could pull off a surprise second. But even so, he has nowhere to go after New Hampshire. The party at large is clearly not looking for someone more centrist than Romney, and no amount of bounce will make Huntsman of interest in famously conservative South Carolina.

One piece of good news in the New Hampshire windup? If you read my earlier blog on "the gaffe" you know that I abhor how feeding frenzies around stray comments obscure actual substance. To their credit, Gingrich and Santorum took the high road and avoided pouncing on Romney's "I like to be able to fire people" miss-comment, recognizing the substance of what he was saying about flexible health care being better for companies. Glimmers of adulthood are always welcome in a presidential race.

Akemashite omedetou gozaimasu!

 Or, as our friends in Japan would say, Happy New Year!

Just brief one today to say happy New Year's to you all, and publicly witness my intention for the year. I have a New Year's tradition for the past few years, which I picked up from the very wise book The Language of Letting Go. It's pretty simple: set some quiet time aside and write down everything you might wish for the coming year. Big goals, little goals, pie-in-the-sky dreams, all of it. And then, once you have it all down, turn it over to the Universe, any such Higher Powers as you see fit, to fulfill as it will.

I've found it's a very good way to witness and own what I want and at the same time release my hands from the levers of control about how, when or if it comes to pass.

What I'd like to share today is not the list, although I did note in making it that it was both smaller than in previous years, and eminently achievable. Which tells me the good news that my life is a lot less pent up than it used to be. Instead, what I'd like to share is the release part of my intention.

Which is that, all individual goals coming and going as they may, what I would really like to manifest for this year, after all the rushing around of 2011 (two weddings! one cross-country move! punishing work schedule! etc., etc.) is a year of living simply, in balance, and just being.

May you all have a blessed New Year!   

Iowa Morning After Thoughts

Just a few quick reactions to last night's first in the nation honest to goodness voting, in terms of placement order:

Romney- A win is a win, even if only by 8 votes, and he's going on to New Hampshire, which he's overwhelmingly likely to win too. Double bonus! On the other hand, the fact that he just squeaked past Santorum, Paul was also in the 20s, another two candidates were at or above 10%, and he only barely got more votes in Iowa than in 2008 even after 4 years of campaigning is hardly a ringing endorsement. He's never going to win by ringing endorsement though, more by lack of credible alternative. Which probably will work for him in the end...

Santorum- I really think this is more like a flash in the pan. He just happened to get what every other anti-Romney missed by timing, a surge just before voting actually started. New Hampshire isn't going to be good territory for him though, which means he'll have a good two weeks of media scrutiny before getting to friendlier ground in South Carolina. And like Bachmann and Perry, he isn't especially well-suited to being in the spotlight. Even yesterday, past statements by him that will be a little too unpalatable to more centrist voters were starting to surface.

Paul- Doesn't get as much traction as first or second would have gotten him, but more than doubled his '08 vote. And he's going on to New Hampshire, where he can make a strong play for second as well. In any case, a candidacy like his can hang in there with less funds than any of the others. There's every chance he's positioned to remain some kind of presence up until the convention, which will be an interesting challenge for party leadership. 

Gingrich- Coming in fourth isn't great, especially since he's poised to come in third or fourth in New Hampshire too. On the other hand, I wouldn't count him out. He's scrappy and wily. With Bachmann out and Perry possibly folding, if Santorum starts to shrivel over the next few weeks under media scrutiny, he could, by Super Tuesday, once again be the only credible anti-Romney. Of course, in the meantime, lack of funds and organization is preventing him from even getting on the ballot in some states, so he may not be able to capitalize on this turn of events even if it does occur.

Perry- Seems to be making contradictory statements about whether or not he's still in. It's hard to see how fifth in Iowa, and likely ending up there again in New Hampshire, is a prelude to a comeback. On the other hand, he's unique in having the funds to stay in as long as we wants, success or no. He can easily remain through South Carolina and even Florida. The only effect I can see that having though, is not positioning him for a breakout, but preventing Santorum or Gingrich from solidifying as viable alternatives to Romney.

Bachmann- Our first casualty of the actual election season. One thing I do like about her story is that she was never taken as a token candidate because of her gender. She was fully viable. Except for being batshit crazy. It shows how much room Hillary Clinton, and yes indeed, Sarah Palin too, opened up in 2008, which I think is good for the future of our republic no matter what party you're in.

Huntsman- I think it's actually remarkable he got votes at all, considering that he'd consciously abandoned the state. This shouldn't effect his decent shot at doing well in New Hampshire, but it's hard to see where he'd have to go from there.

And so, on to New Hampshire!

Newt, we hardly knew ye...

In a few hours, we should all start feasting on the results of the first real honest-to-gosh voting in the country, from the Iowa Caucuses. (At least us political junkies will be feasting.)

The RealClearPolitics national poll of polls isn't very up-to-date at this point, since it has only one poll of six that includes any results after 12/18. That's actually no big loss, since from this point on individual state results are what matter. Here's what the much more up-to-date Iowa polling average is showing:

As you can see, Romney is currently eking out an extremely narrow lead over Ron Paul, and Rick Santorum is in the midst of a surprising last-minute surge that has him at third and rising. Poor Newt, who only a few weeks again was strongly leading, is now fourth.

These rankings may indeed hold, but, as my new friend Swing State Voter reminds us, a caucus is not like a primary. In short, it doesn't depend on simple votes by secret ballot, but on committed voters showing up to very small meetings throughout the state, and publicly standing up for a candidate and convincing their neighbors to do so as well. This tends to favor candidates with the funding to organize and turn people out statewide (in this case Romney, and, though the polls don't show it, Perry), or with a devoted following who will show up no matter what (Ron Paul to a T, and whoever the Evangelical vote most strongly backs, which seems at this point to be Santorum).

Absent from this list? Newt Gingrich, which could be very bad news for him.

It's hard to see how a fourth place finish in Iowa wouldn't result in a third or worse in New Hampshire, which would rapidly erode his position of strength in South Carolina and Florida later this month. Of course, as many analysts have pointed out, including Nate Silver at FiveThirtyEight.com, how you do relative to expectations actually ends up mattering more than where you place. If enough people think that Gingrich is a goner, and he then does better than expected in Iowa or New Hampshire, he could still remain viable. You may recall how in 1992 a cat named William Jefferson Clinton got blown out in Iowa and then placed second in New Hampshire, but compared to the DOA he was believed to be at that point, was actually able to spin that as a victory. Still, I wouldn't advise Newt to hold his breath on pulling that off.

What about Romney? A win, even a narrow one, in Iowa, followed by almost certain victory in New Hampshire could turn this back into the quick coronation he's wanted it to be all along. The only other candidates who were not sitting presidents that I could find who pulled this double-header off in the post-Watergate era were Al Gore in 2000 (who won 50 out of 50 primaries and caucuses) and John Kerry (who won 46 out of 50). But...

As Swing State has also pointed out, Santorum is the only person in that list who's showing surging momentum, and as I've noted above, caucus dynamics favor "devotional" candidates like Ron Paul. Romney could just as easily end up third (even if very, very narrowly). He'd probably still win New Hampshire, but the fact that three other candidates there are sitting on double digits would be harder to spin away. The field would remain plenty feisty into Super Tuesday. And that field, which has concentrated on tearing each other down instead of targeting Romney in Iowa, could now start to spend against him heavily.


So it may not be quite over yet (before it's begun!). Tune in in a few hours...   

25 Most-played Songs in 2011

Full disclosure: This is not a top 25 of songs released in 2011, or played on the radio in 2011.

Those of you who know me know that I love statistics and numerical patterns. iTunes seems to share my obsession, and one of my favorite things every time I synch the iPod up to load a new playlist is seeing how my top 25 most-played songs has changed. Since the year is now over, I'll reset statistics tomorrow, but first I wanted to review the past year. Consider it my Holiday present to you, dear readers...

Here, without fear and favor (and in alphabetical order to further reduce the favoritism) are my top 25 most-played songs in 2011 (links mostly to live versions, but feel free to play the originals if you've got 'em!):

All Along The Watchtower (Bob Dylan, Before the Flood)- This is a live version with the Band from a tour album Dylan released in the 70s. It's one of 6? 7? versions I have in my library. Not my favorite version (that would be the original), but there's a soft spot in my heart for this album, as listening to it on my parent's record player after school was the start of my induction into the glories of classic rock.

Batman (Jan & Dean, Surf City: The Best of Jan & Dean)- I can testify, I did end up listening to this a lot this year. Every time has been as delightfully silly as the first. I've got to hand it to Jan & Dean, though, this song evidences a better understanding of the uncanny darkness of the character than the campy 60s TV series did.

Could You Be The One? (Husker Du, Warehouse Songs & Stories)- The thing about all these 80s nostalgia kiddies around now is that they had no idea just how bad it was. Overproduced top 40 was everywhere, TV, the movies, the Mall. There was no escaping it. The only way you could find anything different unless you were in a big city was in a small record store that you had to learn about from friends that had a locked case in the back with a few alternative rock cassettes. Then, maybe, if you were lucky, you could find something like this bubbling up from the underground, keeping rock just barely alive in an era that had prefab slickened it to within an inch of its life.

Darkside (Tanya Donelly, beautysleep)- I'm a big fan of the Pixies and Throwing Muses, and all solo careers that have flowed from there, hence their strong presence in my playlist. The album that this is from, by Throwing Muses co-founder Tanya Donelly, came across my path immediately following my separation in 2002. It was like a beacon of light, giving me faith that a life of shimmering beauty and deep meaning was waiting out there somewhere past the darkness...

Down By The River (Neil Young & Crazy Horse, Decade)- Ah, Neil Young, one of my all-time top 5 musical artists (along with Dylan, the Who, the Pixies and Nirvana, in case you're wondering). There's also something hauntingly beautiful, yearning and melancholy about this. Easily my favorite shooting down your lover song. Which is a distressingly crowded genre!

Full Moon, Empty Heart (Belly, Star)- Belly was the group Tanya Donelly formed in the mid-90s after being with the Breeders for their first album, which came after her exit from the Throwing Muses. Like all the best of her work, this is evocative, full of gauzy beauty, and underlined by serrated guitar that underlines its delicacy with steel.    

Ginger Park (50 Foot Wave, Golden Ocean)- One good Muse deserves another, in this case in the form of 50 Foot Wave, the current vehicle of Tanya's half-sister and fellow founding Throwing Muse Kristin Hersh. The combination of the harsh shred of her voice and the guitar, backed up with the lyrics (I don't belong there/ I guess I never will/ I don't belong anywhere) simultaneously makes me feel chilled and crawlingly itchily warm.

Green (Throwing Muses, In A Doghouse)- And now here they are together! Albeit this is one of the rare songs written and sung by Tanya Donelly that the Muses did. Hence, I imagine, her eventual decision to split and go solo. There's a driving urgency behind this song, a sound that's like someone just on the edge of really losing it.

A Hard Rain's A-Gonna Fall (Bob Dylan, The Freewheelin' Bob Dylan)- This album, Dylan's big original breakthrough, was another of the ones raided from my parent's that started me on my musical journey. While it was written in an attempt to cram in everything he thought and felt as the world seemed on the edge of holocaust during the Cuban Missile Crisis, it's no less affecting today. The poet as prophet, after all, inherently taps into a timeless space.    

Her Majesty (the Beatles, Abbey Road)- One of many cute little snippets from Abbey Road that kind of makes you wish they'd been developed to full length. Although I'm not sure how long you could sustain this ditty of a love-song to the Queen.

I'll Cry Instead (the Beatles, A Hard Day's Night)- Most of my favorite early Beatles songs tend to be John's. There's just more anguish and edge to them, as here, where he's simultaneously crying over the loss of his girl and boasting about his ability to break and load every girl in the world. Oh Johnny...

I Don't Believe You (She Acts Like We Never Have Met) (Bob Dylan, Another Side of Bob Dylan)- Early Dylan has a lot of bitter telling-off a theoretical gal songs. I don't think of this as being one of my favorites, but apparently it snuck into my playlists pretty often. Also a fine example of the "Dylan nearly cracks up in the middle of a song" genre, which could generate a playlist of its own.

I Should Have Known Better (the Beatles, A Hard Day's Night)- Remember what I said above about John Lennon's early Beatles songs? Ditto here. It's a sweet straightforward love song, but just underneath the surface you can tell something's a little wrong. And isn't that what the urgency of early love is so often like?

I Walk The Line (Johnny Cash, The Legendary Sun Records Story)- I would have been mighty upset if some Johnny Cash hadn't made it in to this list. I love his early Sun stuff, there's something very simple about the songs musically and they're lyrically totally straightforward. But despite that, or maybe because of it, they're full of depth.    

Lay Lady Lay (Bob Dylan, Nashville Skyline)- Sometimes this song doesn't quite do it for me, since it tends to get overplayed. But there's something about Dylan's country croon, bright ringing guitar and tender entreaty here that wins out. Besides which, my parents played it at their wedding, so this song practically conceived me. Doubly so since they were married December 26th and I was born September 28th of the following year.

Lovely Rita (the Beatles, Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band)- Not one of my favorite Beatles albums, it suffers for me from the overplay and overhang of "this is the most important, popular music-changing album of all time". That all being said, this is one of my favorite songs. There's something very swinging 60s about seducing the meter maid, and a winning contrast between McCartney's poppy presence and the slightly sinister distorted Lennon backing.

Lucy In the Sky With Diamonds (the Beatles, Sgt. Pepper's Lonely Hearts Club Band)-  The very heart of Beatles overplay. For me too, apparently, since it's on this list! So, not one of my favorites, but there is something undeniably arresting about the musical layering and surrealistic imagery.

Night Flight (Led Zeppelin, Physical Graffiti)- I maintain that Physical Graffiti is one of the most sonically perfect albums ever recorded. I also have a theory that it represents a kind of capstone of Classic rock, a point at which nostalgia for the passage of flower power past officially replaces the living actual feeling that something great and wonderful was about to happen. This song is that to a T.

Paint It Black (the Rolling Stones, Aftermath)- Through some glitch of iTunes, this song ended up on every playlist I downloaded, even though it wasn't included in the playlists themselves in my iTunes library. The result, of course, was that I ended up listening to it a lot. Not a bad thing, really. Take away the 60s nostalgia and you can see it for what it is, one of the most creepily nihilistic expressions ever committed to record by a popular group.          

Ready Steady Go (Generation X, No Thanks! The 70s Punk Rebellion)- Speaking of 60s nostalgia, here's a song that's a conscious repudiation of it, and yet, in it's poppy bounciness recalls the best of the British Invasion. It's also a reminder that Billy Idol once had something going for him.

Sexy Results (Death From Above 1979, You're a Woman, I'm a Machine)- The 2000s have been a rough period, musically. Kind of as dismal at the mass market level as the 80s, maybe even more so. But even in the worst eras there's always something going on somewhere, as DFA's re-imagining of heavy metal as dance music is here to remind us. 

Speedy Marie (Frank Black, Frank Black 93-03)- Speaking of the dearth of something going on in the 2000s, one of the best albums I bought last decade was this collection, which chiefly features songs from the 90s. What can I say, I'm a fool for the Pixies, and the solo work of their former front man as well. This is not one of my favorite songs by him, but it does go down super-smooth, with a strange aftertaste from the phrasing of the highly literate lyrics.

Subliminal (Suicidal Tendencies, Suicidal Tendencies)- Yes, I was an 80s alternative kid, but I think everyone should love the album this is from. I mean, really, listen to it. it was released in 1983, and everything that would actually become popular in the 90s amalgamation of punk and metal into grunge is already here, with a little shout out to rap metal as well from an era when hip-hop itself was in its infancy.

To Be Alone With You (Bob Dylan, Nashville Skyline)- Nashville Skyline is one of my favorite albums and this is a bright and shiny little gem from it. It just rolls along, so uncharacteristically cheerful. Plus, I perennially love that, "Is it rolling Bob?" that kicks it off.     

Won't Fall In Love Today (Suicidal Tendencies, Suicidal Tendencies)- Opportunity to repeat everyting I said above about Suicidal Tendencies. Only faster, since this song clocks in at 1:00 exactly!

So there you have it. This may tell us as much about the algorithms of the iPod as it does about me, or popular music. But I am pretty proud of the nearly half-century span of music (from I Walk The Line in 1956 to Sexy Results in 2004) on display here. Happy New Year all, and happy listening to come in 2012!


       

 





 

The Gingrinch will not steal Christmas, but don't count him out

In my blog from a  few weeks ago about Gingrich's sudden rise among Republican voters, I looked at the timing of the previous booms and busts of alternates to Romney. Based on the periodicity of Bachmann, Perry and Cain, I'd made a numerological guess that he would peak on 12/2, and start a sharp drop-off on 12/23. As you can see below, things have ended up working out a little differently:

In fact his high, of 35%, was reached on 12/13/11. And while the last three claimants to the anti-Romeny throne each had roughly three weeks on top before beginning their respective plunges, poor Newtie only seems to have gotten a few days. His polling average started a fall on 12/16, and as of 12/21, has fallen 5 percent in 5 days.

While this certainly looks to prevent him from running away with it (which I think he would have if he truly held on to a lead three weeks from his 12/13 peak, which would have had him still way on top when Iowa votes January 3rd), I think there's equally good reasons to think he's far from finished. He has a lot more going for him in terms of intellect, policy acumen and public presence than Bachmann and Perry, who wilted under scrutiny, and certainly doesn't have the kind of problems that Cain did when he propositioned his way to collapse.

What's going on is more like the effects of the whole field aiming their ammunition at him over the last 10 days, and the fact that the focus on him is showing him to be a little unpalatable. But, without the major handicaps of the others, there's nothing here that would wipe him off the map. Which makes it quite possible that we end up with something like: Gingrich loses Iowa, but not by enough to be embarrassing (especially since current trends make it seem like Ron Paul might win!). Romney wins New Hampshire, but not by enough to be impressive. Gingrich then wins South Carolina and Florida, leaving three consistent vote-getting candidates to duke it out in February and March, maybe long enough that nobody has enough delegates to win the nomination until June. Or maybe not even then.

At the very least, Romney does not appear to be in for a cake walk. I read a piece recently that laid out four scenarios, none of which involved Romney quickly and decisively wrapping it up. I also read an interesting piece comparing Romney to Nixon in 1968 as an ideologically indistinct candidate that the party didn't particularly want, but eventually swallowed its distaste for after repeatedly failing to find an alternative. Finally, the other day I read this article on Gingrich's current fall which makes many of the same points I made in my original blog on November 19th.

Which, if nothing else, at least backs up my conviction that, in a parallel world where I'd opted for journalism school instead of years of misadventure in the business world, I could have made a pretty fair political journalist.

In Praise of Scary Cows

 One of the things I dearly miss about San Francisco is Scary Cow, the independent film co-op that I was a member of for the last four years. It was founded by Jager McConnell, in part in response to a problem he kept running in to in the course of pursuing independent film-making: he would post online looking for cast and crew for a project, but then the day of shooting a flake factor would often mean key people, maybe even everybody, failed to show up. With a $50 monthly fee for members, Scary Cow takes advantage of the fact that people are much more likely to show up for something they're paying for.

It also solves another key problem for independent film makers: access to equipment and crew. The co-op format brings together people with varying specialties, levels of experience and access to equipment and enables them to pool their resources. At a pitch meeting every few months, any member who has a project in mind stands up before the group to present it, and then gathers together names of interested people. Directors, producers, writers, cinematographers, light and sound people can all be assembled in short order.

Finished ten-minute projects then screen to an audience of several hundred at the end of each round in a local theater in San Francisco (lately the grand old Castro Theatre). The audience votes on favorites, and top vote-getters are awarded funds for future projects and the chance to screen longer 20-minute pieces. I can testify that some really great films have been produced, many of them going on to film festival success outside of Scary Cow. So far two teams have expanded their work to feature length films as well, the documentary Iran is Not the Problem, and the delightful musical comedy shoe fetish extravaganza Devious Inc. The group is currently gearing up to support even more feature-length projects.

My own involvement began in 2007, when years of wanting to be involved in film finally reached a boiling point and happily intersected with seeing a posting about Scary Cow online. In four years with the group, I had a chance to work on 13 films, and went from having no formal experience to getting to try out just about every role imaginable: actor, art director, assistant director, best boy, casting, director, extra, producer, production assistant, props manager, script supervisor, shot log and writer.

On six films I got to be a principal participant (some combination of director, producer and writer), for a total of 75 minutes of screen time. That's almost a feature length in most parts of the world! Along the way, I also got to participate in many of the workshops the co-op held, led by experienced cinematographers, directors and producers. At $50/month for 44 months, plus about $1,000 I put in directly to making films along the way (craft services can really add up!), and then workshop fees, for under $4,000 over four years I got a thorough introduction to film-making and got to meet and network with hundreds of people. That's a significant bang for your buck compared to most any film school you could name.

While I'm sadly far from the herd now that I've moved, I'm working on finishing the first draft of my first feature-length screenplay (currently 103 pages and counting), informed by everything I learned with Scary Cow. And I have a half dozen films that I had a primary role in to show for my efforts too:

Carson Larson Gets the Picture- The very first film I worked on, which I got to co-write along with Alex Winter (who produced it) and Jason Hoag (who directed it), and also worked as a production assistant and had a small role in.

Geek Wars- Which I wrote and produced, and Richard Armentrout directed.

Deaf Dumb and Blind Date- Also written and produced by me, and directed by Richard. This was actually a companion piece to Geek Wars, intended to be part of a three-part 20-minute film called Triptych, which I never got the prize money to screen in its full-length. I can arrange home screenings if you like, though, and meantime I think this holds up niftily well on its own.

The Buddhist News- The brainchild of national treasure and co-star of Geek Wars Matthew Weinberg, which I co-wrote with him and Assistant Directed, and also spit up on screen for.
 
Ave Maria- My baby, which I wrote, directed and produced, based on a short story I'd written. Which was way too much to do all by myself, but I guess I really wanted to get it made! I learned a ton, and while it was a long haul to get it done, I'm super-proud of it.

23 Ways In Which I Could Die- Co-written with Matthew, and Co-directed by myself and Fathy Elsherif, this film just screened in November. It's not online yet, but when it is I'll let you know. Until then, vive la Scary Cow!



           

Review: Superman/Batman: Vengeance

Superman/Batman: Vengeance (Jeph Loeb/Ed McGuiness, DC, 2006, originally Superman/Batman #20-25)

Dearest Blog, I don't know if we've ever discussed this before, but I am a comics collector from way back. Probably this is not news to you, given my other proclivities, but just for the record, there it is. 

In my earliest form, in the halcyon age of those spinny metal wracks in supermarkets, I was a fan of horror comics. I would load up every time my parents went shopping. As I got a little older, I became an acolyte of Marvel. This was in the early-mid 80s, when they were really the shit- The X-Men, Fantastic Four, Thor, Spiderman et al were in the midst of some of their best runs. Except for following writer/artist John Byrne's run on Superman when he went to DC from Marvel, and Frank Miller's work on Batman, I wasn't very interested in DC. Compared to Marvel's attempts at psychological and physical realism, DC was just a little too cartoony, too hokey, with the fake cities (Metropolis, Central City, etc.), unlimited god-like powers, silly weaknesses like kryptonite and the color yellow.

As with many things that had been a key part of my life (writing being front and center on that list), I put down comics when I went to graduate school in the mid-90s. My soul went into hibernation and life got more and more off track. After recovery and separation and other major life changes, I began to pick up things again (writing being front and center!) in 2002. And so comics have returned to my life, fueled by the collections of storylines into big softcover trade paperbacks that has become one of the major distribution modes of the 2000s.

I've caught up with some great stuff this decade. And to my surprise, I've found that in my old age I've become a big fan of DC. In part, it's certainly because younger writers and artists have shaken up the formerly staid world of DC. But I think it also reflects my own ability to connect now, after a lot more of life's twists and turns, with the basic, archetypal legends that DC has to offer. They deliver comics myth-making in its most elemental form.

None are more archetypal than Superman and Batman, two golden oldies still running strong after 70 years. Each has several monthly series devoted to them, but they also co-starred during the 2000s in Superman/Batman. I have dearly loved it for how it takes the two biggest toys in the DC Universe, presents them at the peak of their careers, and spins an ongoing storyline involving the two of them but liberally drawing on heroes and villains from all over DC. 

This is the fourth collection from that series, and it's a doozy! I'm allergically opposed to spoilers, so I won't give away much that you don't learn in the first few pages: Superman and Batman find themselves crossing paths in a parallel universe with the Maximums, a wonderful parody/homage of the "Ultimate" version of Marvel's Avengers. This could be a throwaway concept in the wrong hands, but the Maximums are very well done, the kind of loving forgery that shows as much affection as cattiness toward Marvel. Along the way, alternate Supermans and Batmans galore enter in, as do Bizarro and Batzaro. The series also draws in threads from almost everything that's happened in issues 1-19. You should probably read the other three collections first ("Public Enemies", "Supergirl" and "Absolute Power"), but once you're done, this volume delivers international, intergalactic and interdimensional fun in a way that only DC can get away with.

 

The Blog must go on...

I'm on two weeks now of feeling sick and low energy. But this does not matter. What matters is the Blog. Well, writing more generally, but at this moment, the Blog more specifically. What happened in 2010 and through most of 2011 cannot be allowed to continue. Even when there seems to be nothing to say, the Blog must go on.

That is all.

Review: The Big Book of Conspiracies

The Big Book of Conspiracies (Doug Moench, Paradox Press, 1995, 223 pp.)

I just finished this book, which had been part of my recent Amazon birthday haul, so I thought I would strike the iron of review while the reading is still hot. Or something like that.

I have to say I quite enjoyed it, perhaps even more than its sister volume The Big Book of the Unexplained. I certainly found this tome to be more disquieting. And delightful. That's right, delightfully disquieting.

That's what you get when you have well-researched text on some of the darkest conspiracy allegations out there illustrated by 39 different comic artists. I think this is actually a pretty compelling combination, which could profitably be used a lot more than it is. There's like this, and Classic Comics. And I guess that whole Introducing/For Beginners book series, which I'm also a big fan of. Someone likes narrative art, apparently...

A word on the artists themselves: they were really good! It was a pleasure to run in to a few names I knew well from mainstream comics: Frank Quitely, Michael Avon Oeming and Bob Smith, for example. A lot of the others though, were from alternative comics, with styles ranging from cartoonish to dark and surreal. I look forward to catching up with what they've been up to since the mid-90s.

As far as the text goes, Moench is a comics writer as well, and the writing benefits from the best features of the medium: it's lucid, fast-moving, and entertaining. It's also, despite the obvious mirth behind the form, well-researched and packed with information. As in a five page double column bibliography citing the sources for what's presented in the 39 chapters.

Conspiracy theory is as conspiracy theory does, and some of what's presented here is definitely a wild leap, or based on specious connections. I enjoyed further researching a lot of it online as well, and, predictably, some things are less sinister (and solid) than they appear to be at first glance. There are others, though, that get more disquieting. To touch on a Golden Oldie, what the heck is up with Lee Harvey Oswald? I'm finding that to be the most interesting (and fruitful question) in the whole JFK thing- maybe there was only one gunmen, and he was that one. But how did he end up there, and why, everywhere in his history that you look, do you find strange connections? There's something to this whole CIA-Mafia-Cuban Exile thing.

The JFK assassination, of course, ended up in the book a lot, and much of the rest was pretty familiar territory as well: RFK, MLK, CIA mind control, Freemasons, Karen Silkwood, the always dear to my heart UFO-conspiracies. There were also some that were new to me such as:

• Multiple intriguing threads linking Jonestown to the CIA
• The international businessman/secret agent James Douglas Morrison that started showing up all over the place right after Jim Morrison's "death"
• Truly bizzare Reagan assassination attempt tidbits such as the fact that John Hinckley Senior was a friend of George Bush Sr., his son Neil Bush had dinner plans with John's brother Scott Hinckley the day of the assassination attempt, and a second Jodie Foster-obsessesed young man threatening Reagan was arrested with a gun at New York Port Authority a few days after the attempt
• John Whiteside Parsons. Look him up online, and bathe in the weird goodness that is this sadly deceased patriot/JPL scientist/follower of Aleister Crowley. 

The book also re-introduced me to the strange death of Danny Casolaro, who was found dead in a hotel of an apparent suicide as he was working on a book about the conspiracy that he claimed linked the October Surprise, Iran Contra, the S&L scandal and just about every other shady late 80s thing there was with a government attempt to steal a security-monitoring software. Were some of his sources questionable? Yep. Did he have financial troubles and other frustrations that could lead to suicide? Yep. Was he being warned off before his death in calls overheard by third parties? Yep. Were his research files missing from the hotel, and never subsequently found? Yep. Again, worth further reading on your part.

But don't tell anyone I told you so. Or send them a hyperlink to this review...

   

Gingrich at his peak? Maybe yes, maybe no...

My November 19th blog on Republican Booms and Busts used the admittedly small sample size of the average timeline of other Republican candidates' rise and fall as alternatives to Romney to predict that the latest anti-Romney, Newt Gingrich, would hit a polling peak on December 2nd, and begin a plunge on December 23rd. So how's it looking?

Actually not too bad for the first part. On December 1st, Gingrich reached his all-time peak (so far) of 26.6% on the Real Clear Politics polling average, and has remained at that level since then:

Might this be the peak? One good reason to think it could is that polling slowed down so much around Thanksgiving that there is only one national poll covering the period after 11/20, a Rasmussen Reports poll that had Gingrich at 38% and Romney at 17%. Since this is only a single poll, and Rasmussen polls historically tend to skew more conservative, the chances of it being an outlier are fairly high, and new polls that show Gingrich still ahead, but by less than 21%, would tend to back him off a little from the high this poll contributed to.

On the other hand, today's piece of breaking news is that Herman Cain is suspending his campaign following the damage wrought this week by a woman who claims to be having an affair with him. While he denies it, he does admit to paying her bills and she has phone records that show months of contact between them. Prior to this, he had stabilized at around 15% despite the swarm of earlier allegations of woman trouble, and could probably have hung in around there until the voting started.

Now his votes will be looking for somewhere new to go, and all indications are that Gingrich and Perry are more likely to get them than Romney, which push Newt even higher and keep him near the top long enough to actually still be in the lead when voting starts one month from today.  

There are still plenty of good reasons to think that Romney will eventually be the nominee. Look at this Washington Post article, for example, to see the advantages his lead in money and organization give him in building a machine that will accumulate delegates throughout the process. But it's looking increasingly like Newt might just hang in there long enough to at least make it interesting.

Plum Island Thanksgiving

On Saturday Abbey, her Mom and I visited the Parker River National Wildlife Refuge, a 4,700 acre reserve that is a playground for migratory birds on Plum Island, near Newburyport, MA:

While we weren't quite there on Thanksgiving itself, we did, as you can see above, cross paths with wild turkeys, which is pretty darn seasonal. The reserve is on an 11-mile long barrier island, with, accordingly, a beach side:

 And a marshy inlet side:

Other than the turkeys, a beautiful pair of Mute Swans that reminded me of the Palace of Fine Arts Lagoon, and a black cat on a fencepost as we were leaving when it was unfortunately way too dark to show up on film, we didn't see particularly exotic wildlife, but it sure was pretty:

 

 Besides which, a guy just likes spending time with his gal and her Mom.

P.S. Bonus extra credit for anyone who can positively ID the following plant, and tell me if I will drop dead if I eat the berries:

America's Stonehenge 978-Newt 130

 A quick one here, holiday week and all. I've been looking for appropriate sites to display some of my blog content on. Accordingly, I posted my recent blog on Newt Gingrich's polling rise to the 2012 elections board on Reddit.com.

Reddit is a pretty groovy place in terms of aggregating news and content from a variety of sites in a user-moderated environment. The Newt piece got some decent traffic, so I decided to post my recent America's Stonehenge column in their paranormal section.

The results? The Newt Gingrich post has generated 130 pageviews. America's Stonehenge? 978! Does this say something about the relative online audience for news of the Paranormal versus Presidential elections?

P.S.- Over 1,100 page views between them, and still only one comment on either blog. What's a brother got to do to get some reader interaction going?!?

Republican Booms and Busts

Oddly, I'm not talking about the business cycle here. Instead, I'm talking about the following phenomenon (provided courtesy of the "poll of polls" updated daily at Real Clear Politics):

That green line now reaching for the sky on the far right (all appropriate puns intended) is Newt Gingrich, currently enjoying a popularity boom in the polls tracking candidates for the Republican nomination. As you'll see to the left, the same thing has previously happened to Michelle Bachmann (black), Rick Perry (blue) and Herman Cain (red). Mitt Romney (purple), meanwhile, remains remarkably range-bound, never lower than 15%, never much higher than 25%, as various opponents shoot up and fade away.

Now I'm hardly the first person to notice this. But, lover of figures and charts that I am, Gingrich's path along the same boom as his predecessors made me wonder if there's any regularity to the pattern. Curious, I tracked the timing of the beginning of the surge, reaching peak, and start of drop-off of the last three candidates:

It was interesting to see that, while the three boomlets so far have taken different amounts of time to reach a peak, that amount of time from peak to beginning of steep drop was remarkably similar. It makes me wonder if there's some kind of structure to media saturation, boredom and vicious turn, such that the newscycle of three weeks is inherently how long you can stay on top once you get there. Even more fun, since we can spot on the polling graph the date of the beginning of Gingrich's surge, it's actually possible to predict the timing of his peak and fall based on the average of the last three:

So, if his cycle follows the average of the last three candidates, he'll reach his polling high on December 2nd, and begin a steep drop-off December 23rd. Which won't be a great Christmas present for him. Even worse giving the following dates:

1/3/12    Iowa
1/10/12  New Hampshire
1/21/12  South Carolina
1/31/12  Florida


In other words, his peak of popularity will likely come (and start to end) too early to translate into success in the first primaries and caucuses. Which would leave the consistently medium Mitt Romney again on top just as the voting starts, giving him the nomination despite GOP voters' obvious equally consistent search for someone they're more excited about than him. A lot of people have thought all along that this is the most likely outcome, and I tend to agree. But I can imagine a few reasons Newt's experience might be different:

1. Everything tends to slow down over the holidays, and media cycles are probably no exception. Thanksgiving, Christmas and New Year's just might stretch out the cycle enough that Newt is still at or near the top when voting starts.

2. If you look at the above dates, one thing that can be clearly seen is that, in each case the next comer was already starting to climb a few days before the previous person started to plunge. In other words, the "anybody but Romney vote" has probably remained consistent, and just looks for someone new to transfer to. This might work for Newt because there's nobody else left. Bachmann, Perry and Cain have all had their day, Huntsman is too centrist for the field, Santorum has never gotten more than 2-3%, and Ron Paul is Ron Paul. Of course, someone new could get in, but this would be difficult at this point given early primary filing dates being closed or soon closing. So, the opposition to Romney might have to stick with Gingrich now, for better or for worse. 

3. A large part of what's happened with the last three anti-Romneys is that they were still relatively unknown to a general audience, and the inevitable airing of their dirty laundry (plus just letting people hear the ridiculous kinds of things they say) started to pull down their popularity shortly after its surge. Gingrich has plenty of negatives, but they're well known both in the party and among the public in general. If primary voters are liking him now, it's not like they're about to find out things they didn't know that will make them reconsider.

Mind you, these are just reasons he might not totally self-incinerate before the voting starts in January. All this might really mean is that Romney is left with a somewhat credible opponent at that point. With his funding, organization, and consistent hanging in there, he's still likely to be the nominee in fairly short order.

Which leaves us all with the shudder-inducing possibility that we could have a general-election that de facto begins by, say, April 1. Seven months of gaffes and spin and irresponsible rhetoric, saints preserve us all...