In the heavily spin-doctored world of campaign season, Buchanan claimed that his victory was a clarion-call to the American public and sold himself as Bob Dole's biggest threat. "I think I've emerged as the clear first-tier challenger to Senator Dole," he stated in a TV interview after his victory. The snide chuckle comes easily; Buchanan accomplished much the same thing in 1988 after coming in a close second to George Bush in the New Hampshire primary, and his campaign faded fast afterwards.

As for Gramm, who sold himself as a front-runner from the moment he launched his campaign, the spin goes this way: he's the noble candidate who cared enough about hard-working Americans to campaign in every state (unlike Dole), and his loss to Buchanan in Louisiana is just a short-term victory for a small-potatoes protest candidate. Iowa and New Hampshire are the two states that really matter at this stage, and Gramm is jockeying for position there. If he doesn't win, place or show in both of those places, he'll have to shut off the lights at Gramm Central Station.

The big picture? Louisiana doesn't mean much; Buchanan calling himself a viable candidate after the caucus is a bit like the Chicago Cubs calling themselves undefeated after winning at Wrigley on opening day. Still, pundits have to consider the possibilities. Apart from everything else, Gramm is considered one of the few candidates with enough smarts and political savvy to compete with Dole; if he can't even take a small caucus, Dole might as well start writing his RNC acceptance speech, right? And if Buchanan is the first out of the gate, what about the Religious Right's pull in this election season?

Louisiana leaves us with more questions than answers. Iowa and New Hampshire should start clearing up the confusion.

Next Report