John Dickerson's cocktail chatter this week was about how McCain and Guliani will both not be participating in the Iowa Straw Poll. He went on to say that the whole straw poll was merely a way to raise money for the state party, and while journalists will being talking about how silly it is going into it, coming out of it they will still be reporting the results as if they carry weight.

I would think either the Straw poll is silly or it isn't and the prediction that reporters will go in touting its irrelevance and coming out with profound insights about the campaigns indicates some gap.

My question to you guys and gals is, is it time to rewrite the American narrative of how we elect presidents?

As a great fan of the word "narrative" I'm not sure precisely what this question means, but I'll take a stab at it. The narrative is re-written with every campaign and this time it might change a whole lot given the switch in primary dates-- though I can argue there’s a way you can see the old model re-asserting itself-- The winners in Iowa and New Hampshire ultimately battle it out for the nomination and whichever candidate thinks he or she is going to be able to wait until 1/29 or 2/5 will lose out because the news bump that goes to the winners of early primary and caucus states will overtake anyone who waits.

A larger wish of mine though is that we would re-write the campaign narrative. I wish we could get candidates to answer real questions like adults and at length and in turn I wish we all would relax a little and not nail their ears to the wall if they think out loud in a way that might be a little rough or incomplete or might stray for a minute from the orthodoxy of the party from which they come.

My point about the Iowa straw poll was a slightly cynical reference to the way the press covers political action—we say they’re not real but then cover the results as if they’re meaningful or we play the results straight without putting a big asterisk at the top of the story that puts the results in perspective. But I might have been a little too flip. What happens with these straw polls is that those of us in the press all know they’re rigged but then they happen and activists in the party keep talking about them and we can’t not cover the chatter. I tried, in my coverage of the Memphis straw poll a while back to make all of these points in print.

By narrative I meant the "Mr Smith Goes to Washington" idea that the strength of American politics emerges from these folksy rural traditions like the flapjack flip or the straw poll, and not what increasingly seems to be the case of national campaigns with big money and multimedia exposure with tons of spin.

I guess it is the way we view our own political culture. To dip into the well of sports metaphors, we say baseball is our national pastime with its folksy The Natural style, but increasingly the NFL seems to have more fans and sports press coverage. The Straw Poll to me seems like the folksy rural American roots type activity, but in reality it seems like candidates seem to be viewing it as the antiquated relic of an era that has passed.

The straw poll could be that way but I would argue that it was always a hoax of a sort-- campaigns could buy their victories if they wanted to. It's interesting that you mention this though. I would very much like to write a piece if I ever get the time about this set of ideas. Two data points: 1) Iowa and New Hampshire voters jealously guard their position as first in the nation. So they're pissed the top Republicans are bailing on the straw poll and Fred Thompson will find out that you can't do a lot of what needs doing by Internet alone. These activists want to meet you and watch you. But 2) you can't hire volunteers in these states any more. It's all become a buying game with county chairs and volunteers asking to be compensated for their work. In the old days people did it for free because they believed. Now they want scratch.

Interesting note about the paying county chairs for their work. It seems that raising money is even more important than before and not just for tv ads, but to hire people to make the events happen that the media can then report on.

Can Mr. Smith go to Washinton any longer or should he study up on mass hypnosis techniques first?