Today's Tweets

...with slight elaboration.

"3rd mass email this week from BVP at famIly leader says 'Caucusing is Easy' but because endorsement is just personal it can't say who to caucus for."

"One killer ad or a Steve King endorsement could win this." The BVP Not famIly leader endorsement fizzled in its own incompleteness, and Branstad and Grassley are sticking with Iowa First neutrality. Steve's really the only player who could make a difference.

"Bigger story of afternoon: Santorum poll spike or Mitt HQ arrests?" I go with the poll.

"People don't get that Paul 'gaffes' like Get Out Of Korea and Who Cares If Iran Has Nukes aren't gaffes, they're why he's getting support."

"Safe prediction: GOP will decry Ron Paul crossover vote, then after the voter registration numbers are updated brag about their gains."

People don't simply change affiliation. They change when they have a required reason -- such as a bitterly divisive race for governor, where half of the primary electorate voted against a four term governor, and the loser (who never endorsed) ran against the hand picked lieutenant governor candidate at the convention. That'll boost your party registration numbers, sure. So will a splintered caucus where the winner could pull less than 20 percent...

Retweets:

Nate Silver: "Basically, the CNN poll is liable to understate Ron Paul's support in Iowa by several points." Word.

Talking Points Memo: "Gingrich spox on CNN, saying finishing top 5 in Iowa "wouldn't be bad."" Out of six?!?