Why Obama Needs a Mandate

To restore America in a time of economic crisis and partisan hatred, a hairline victory will not be enough. True, George W. Bush turned a deficit of popular votes and a 5-4 Supreme Court decision into a mandate to start the wrong war and try to dismantle the Constitution, but that won't be enough for the first African-American president.

Democrats need an all-out effort in the final three weeks, and it's encouraging to see both Clintons out on the campaign trail with Joe Biden in Pennsylvania yesterday, with the almost-candidate back in fighting form.

"Sending the Republicans to solve this economic crisis," Hillary Clinton told voters, "is like sending the bull to clean up the china closet. They broke it and we're not buying it anymore. Barack Obama and Joe Biden...will lead us out of this economic crisis."

Biden was in cheerleading mode: "I have never seen as many Americans knocked down as I have in the last past eight years. It's time to get up. So get up Pennsylvania, get up Scranton, get up deliver and this election for Barack Obama."

Former Reagan political adviser Ed Rollins is comparing the political landscape to that of 1980, when angry voters rejected Democrats and turned to Reagan "in droves" once they felt comfortable with the idea of him as president.

"Barack has met the threshold," Rollins says. "Once Reagan met the threshold, people wanted to get rid of Carter and they did in a landslide. This is going to turn into a landslide."

The polls don't show that, and there is always the X Factor of unspoken racism--the Bradley effect--that could keep the election close, but Barack Obama needs what FDR got in 1932 to lead a solidly Democratic Congress to get the country out of Iraq and onto the road of economic reform.

America does not need the chaos of a close election.

The Winner Is...Change

Instead of screaming, as he did after his third-place finish as a candidate in 2004, Howard Dean was in Iowa last night as his party's chairman beaming at a huge turnout that bodes well for Democrats' chances in November.

Dean's parochial delight is understandable, but the decisive Obama and Huckabee victories have a larger meaning--that voters are so hungry for change they are willing to entrust the future to the least-tested candidates in their parties rather than those with much more accumulated political experience, power and insider backing.

Both winners have George Bush to thank for that, but it may be a mixed blessing as they continue down the road toward nomination. When the exhilaration subsides, they will be tasked to deliver a detailed picture of their visions for the change they promise and challenged to defend its plausibility.

Huckabee's victory speech struck notes of caring and inclusiveness that Republicans badly need, while Obama rose to a new emotional pitch with echoes of Martin Luther King and Bobby Kennedy in promises to end political polarization, social divisions and a misbegotten war.

With all the messiness of its process, Iowa has spoken clearly in making the first statement of this political year. Next week New Hampshire and next month le deluge.