Also, the weather forecast is sunny, with temps in the 20s Fahrenheit for most of the day. That favors Obama and Clinton over Edwards on the Dem side, and Romney and McCain over Huckabee for the GOP. If it would have snowed tomorrow, those two's high-intensity bases would have carried them to easy victories.

i hope Huckabee doesnt win. Romney, Huckabee, and Clinton want want to ban or heavily regulate games.

All I'm predicting is heavy turn out.  Obama, Clinton and Paul I think will draw out a huge number of independent minded voters.  In terms of cross-over appeal Obama's capacity to inspire Republicans to vote for him should be worth watching, and Clinton will do the same thing to a lesser degree (mainly with older women who appreciate the history-making potential).  Paul I can actually see really hurting Guiliani and some of the lower tier Democrats.

I mean some of the polls have Paul a few points of Guilliani now.  That's freaking hilarious, the so called 'national' centrist candidate could be beaten by a guy most people have not heard about...its fascinating.

My guess is it will end up:

Obama-Clinton-Edwards-Richardson-Kucinich

Huckabee-Romney-McCain-Paul-Thompson-Guiliani

Something like (%) 34-26-22-11-7 on the Democratic side

Something like (%) 38-32-15-10-8-7 on the Republican side

Big winners will be Obama, Huckabee and to a lesser extent McCain and Paul 

what happens if Bush refuse to leave and declare himself the King. After all, he's been the Decider, the Commander, etc... The only option left that might be of interest would the the King.

Welcome to Monarchy.

 I agree that its likely Clinton won't win Iowa but that doesn't mean she's finished. She has a huge lead nationally and is by far the best-known of any candidate in either party. She is in the best position to sustain a defeat in the Iowa cacuses and remain standing, although it is very possible she will lose her lead in other states. Remember that New Hampshire, Michigan, Nevada, South Carolina and Florida all have primaries this month, followed by 22 states on Feb. 5th. Clinton is far from done. 

 Obama could afford to come in a close second or third in Iowa and pick up his momentum in New Hampshire. I think he will be a factor for a long time. 

 Edwards has bet his entire campaign on the results of the Iowa caucuses. If he does not win here, then it is hard to see where he can break out. His campaign languished for most of 2007 and he badly needs to win to boost his campaign.

 I agree that Huckabee's flat-Earth conservatism will not do well in New Hampshire, but if he wins in Iowa it will greatly boost McCain's chances there and if Romney loses in Iowa, he'll probably lose New Hampshire too. Although it is highly unlikely the GOP base in other states will go for someone who supports amnesty for some illegal immigrants. That just seems anathema to republicans.

I think McCain and Barak will take the cake.

I actually said that Clinton has to win NH to remain in the race. If she doesn't get first there, Obama (the likely benefactor) will likely steam-roll through Feb. 5. I agree that she can lose today and still win the nomination, but only if she places a close second to Edwards. If Obama comes in first, she's finished. If she comes in third, she's finished. If Edwards, unlikely as it seems, wins by a large margin, he may actually win NH himself.

If Huckabee win today (I think he will) that's a blow to Romney, but I expect McCain to finish far enough below the other two that he accrues little benefit, and a weakened Romney wins NH almost by default. This is followed by easy victories in Michigan (his father was a popular governor there, and it's now a closed primary, which means no indies to vote for McCain) and Nevada, which has the second-highest proportion of Mormons in the country.

If that doesn't happen, the second most likely scenario is as you said: McCain wins NH, and Michigan becomes a free-for-all. I don't know who would win that, but they would go on to win the nomination.

 When you put it like that the situation seems really dire. 

@Desroko re: Clinton in NH

Sorry, brain is asleep. Really stupid damkira error.

This whole conversation also illustrates what trouble the GOP is in this year. Republican voters are very underwhelmed by their field, and of the five candidates who could have been considered a front-runner at one point this season, only Thompson wouldn't necessarily attract strong opposition from some part of the Republican base.

Romney is a Mormon New Englander who was once pro-choice, which will rile the Christian right. Giuliani is a pro-choice, pro-gay, pro-gun control New Yorker. Huckabee raised taxes as governor and has been the most critical of the Iraq war of any GOP candidate, except Paul. And McCain has been anathema to mainstream conservatives and GOP activists for a while - campaign finance, immigration, and 2000 (when he positioned himself as the moderate alternative to the conservative Bush) saw to that. It's ironic that Thompson, the man most acceptable to the base, has run, by far, the worst campaign of the five.

Obama, Edwards, and Clinton would all face problems in the general election too, but I don't see any of them having to fight a fire in the rear like the GOP nominee will need to do.