I'm struggling to find within myself a gut feeling for how this election is going to shake out. This is odd for me. I usually have a definite opinion and people who know that I am into politics are used to receiving a definite answer. My problem is that I like reading about history, especially political history, and this election is really close to either 1972 or 1976, and it could shakeout either way depending on which context matches best.

In 1972 we had a ton of energy on the Democratic side, rallying around an antiwar candidate and having a lot of fun pointing out the inadequacies and lack of charisma of one Richard Nixon. Richard Nixon may have been unlikeable, but he was very much in tune with the mood of the country. By 1972 he had removed almost all American combat troops from Vietnam, ended the draft. and it wasn't nearly the issue McGovern had hoped it would be.

The silent majority spoke loudly and said they were perfectly fine with Richard Nixon.

But in 1976 there was also a moderate Republican and a lot of energy on the Democratic side, huge economic unrest and it helped push Jimmy Carter into office over Gerald Ford.

My problem in trying to make a prediction, is that I can see either of these scenarios playing out. Is Obama a 2nd Jimmy Carter? Able to tap into a huge mainstream of America that is ready for something new? Or is Obama a George McGovern? Lots of flash and sizzle, but no meat. Many high energy supporters, but many, many more who say, meh, I'll take the old Republican guy, he seems more stable.

If the Republicans had nominated anyone else but McCain, I'd say 1972 in a heartbeat and the Democrats are in for a heartbreak (again), but McCain is uncomfortably close to Gerald Ford, and it might be 1976 again. What's your gut feeling?

In today's issue of the Washington Post, George McGovern treats us to a glimpse of his mental meanderings in a piece entitled, "Why I Believe Bush Must Go." Casting in his lot with a host of other luminaries of the impeachment crowd (including Aragon - er, Viggo Mortensen, smeagol - er, Dennis Kucinich, and the light-hating orcs of the ACLU), McGovern has found immediate and widespread acclaim amongst the knee-jerk, far-left elements of the Democratic political spectrum. His partisan rantings reveal both the insubstantial rhetoric and defeatist pedigree of the present anti-Bush crooning.

McGovern begins his article by explaining that, although he "stood clear of calls to impeach President Richard M. Nixon" after the 1972 election, he has "belatedly and painfully concluded that the only honorable course for me is to urge the impeachment of the president and the vice president." Let us lay aside for a moment questions as to the respect due to the judgment of a man who was defeated 60% - 38% in his presidential bid, losing in the electoral college 520-17, carrying only one state (and that being Massachusetts) and the District of Columbia. Let us also ignore the ignominy (as pointed out by Volokh Conspiracy) that, contrary to his opening statement, McGovern indeed seems to have called for the impeachment of Nixon as early as October 1973.

Instead, let us focus on the content of McGovern's nation-breaking accusations.