It’s often cringe-inducing when the mighty New York Times parachutes one of its reporters into The Heartland to examine our quirky, Midwestern mores with the jaundiced eye of a Manhattan sophisticate. Happily, this is (mostly) not the case in a Bismarck-datelined story today in the Gray Lady.

It examines the presidential campaign finance juggernaut through the prism of per-capita donations and finds that North Dakota ranks dead last in the nation, contributing just 9 cents per person to the candidates. Along the way, it examines the state’s hyper-retail campaign culture and the naer-complete absence from North Dakota, which holds its caucuses on Super Tuesday.

In short, an interesting read.

Barack Obama’s Minnesota campaign has snagged an endorsement from the Minnesota Daily, the venerable, well-regarded daily paper published at the U.

At first blush, that might seem like relatively small potatoes, but the campaign spun it convincingly, calling it a perfect example of the chord Obama has struck among young adults, overwhelmingly winning their support and spurring them to turn out at unheard-of levels in the early states.

Here’s what the paper’s editorial board had to say.

Barely 12 hours before word began leaking out that John Edwards would fold his presidential campaign this afternoon, he sat in a meeting room at a St. Paul union hall and denied — repeatedly — he planned to do any such thing.

Edwards last night, firing up his troops

Edwards was reacting to the non-stop speculation in recent days that his lackluster showings in the first four Democratic contests would force him to bow out, shortly after his campaign announced that he was canceling appearances today in North Dakota and Alabama. Instead, he was headed for New Orleans, where he launched his campaign more than a year ago, to give a major speech on poverty.

At one point in a brief interview, he dismissed the buzz about him dropping out as “nonsense”

And in a full-throated speech to hundreds of fired-up union members, he left them with the clear impression he was in the race for the long haul.

Click here to hear what the former North Carolina senator had to say last night about quitting his second bid for the presidency:

If, like a lot of people, you’re heartily sick of all the presidential candidates braying about change, you might get a kick out of this:

(HT: Anderw Sullivan, who headlined it “The David Bowie Election.”

A new poll of registered voters in Minnesota 10 months before the general election Democratic presidential candidates handily beating their Republican counterparts — with the notable exception of John McCain.

The poll, conducted by this week by SurveyUSA for three of the state’s TV stations, posed head-to-head matchups of either Hillary Clinton or Barack Obama against McCain, Mitt Romney, Rudy Giuliani or Mike Huckabee.

A few grains of salt: Much like national polls at this stage in the campaign, this poll can be as much about name recognition as about the state of the race if the election were held today. Also, with a relatively small sample size of 550 poll respondents, the survey has a whopping margin of error of 4.3 percentage points. That said, here are the matchups:

McCain, 49%
Clinton, 45%
Undecided, 6%

McCain, 49%
Obama, 42%
Undecided, 9%

Clinton, 50%
Romney, 40%
Undecided, 9%

Obama, 55%
Romney, 36%
Undecided, 10%

Clinton, 51%
Giuliani, 40%
Undecided, 9%

Obama, 52%
Giuliani, 36%
Undecided, 11%

Clinton, 50%
Huckabee, 42%
Undecided, 8%

Obama, 49%
Huckabee, 42%
Undecided, 10%

Full poll results and methodology are available here.

Barack Obama’s campaign announced Thursday that it will begin airing an ad in Minnesota from now until the Feb. 5 caucuses. Here’s the ad.

And here’s the transcript of the radio ad:

BO: I’m Barack Obama and I approve this message.

Anncr: Maybe it’s because you want to end a war…

Brian: Obama was against [the war in Iraq] from the beginning.

Anncr: Maybe it’s because he gets where we’re coming from…

Dante: Obama is the candidate for our generation.

Anncr: Or because you’re looking for someone who’ll do what’s right, instead of play political games.

Katie: Barack Obama just has an ability to bring people together.

Anncr: So Barack Obama’s the answer. But here’s the question. What are you doing February 5th? At 6:30 pm?

The change we need begins with you. Caucus on Tuesday, February 5th. But don’t be late – voting ends by 8:00 pm.

Text MN to 62262 or visit Minnesota dot Barack Obama dot com to learn more.

Because Barack Obama’s change we can believe in.

BO: I want you caucusing for me… You have the chance to decide the next president. You’ve got to get involved. You’ve got to get mobilized.

Anncr: It’s your world. On February 5th – help change it.

Two of Hillary Clinton’s prominent Minnesota supporters, former Sen. Mark Dayton and longtime DFL activist Rick Stafford, took to the telephone lines Friday afternoon to smack down Barack Obama over recent comments he made (a move the campaign replicated in other Feb. 5 states).

Speaking to a newspaper editorial board in Nevada (which holds its caucuses Saturday), Obama had said, “I think it’s fair to say the Republicans were the party of ideas for a pretty long chunk of time there, over the last 10, 15 years, in the sense that they were challenging the conventional wisdom.”

Arguable, and, on its face, not that controversial. But that’s not the way Dayton heard it. Clinton, he said, “has challenged the conventional wisdom” and that Republicans provided “really poor models” to the nation.

Those Republican ideas, Stafford added, came from the likes of Newt Gingrich and Michele Bachmann.

Referring to another Obama trope, that he’s not interested in endlessly re-fighting the battles of the 1960s and ’70s, Dayton reeled off the accomplishments of that era he laid at the feet of Democrats: Civil rights, Medicare, environmental protection. He even threw in the sainted names of Hubert Humphrey and Walter Mondale (another Clinton supporter) for good measure. “Are these what he calls the excesses of that era?” Dayton demanded.

Only 18 days until the DFL caucuses. . .

Belated update: The Obama campaign offered this rebuttal:

“It’s hard to take Hillary Clinton’s latest attack seriously when she’s
the one who supported George Bush’s war in Iraq, the most damaging
Republican idea of our generation. While others were triangulating and
poll-testing their positions, Senator Obama has been fighting for
progressive ideals for over two decades.” - Obama spokesman Bill Burton

Saturday marks the 10th anniversary of the opening curtain of Monicagate, the scandal that paralyzed Bill Clinton during the closing years of his presidency, very nearly destroying it.

On that fateful day, the Drudge Report ran an “exclusive” report about an unpublished Newsweek article that reported that Clinton had been having an affair with a White House

intern, who turned out to be none other than Monica Lewinsky.

Despite the news media’s affection for anniversaries of all kinds, this particular one has received relatively little ink, despite (or because of) the fact that it comes smack-dab in the midst of Hillary Clinton’s run for the Democratic presidential nomination. (It was she, you might recall, who said the alleged affair was nothing but a pack of lies whipped up by the Vast Right-Wing Conspiracy.)

First in the mainstream media to allude to it, however indirectly, was NBC’s Chris Matthews, who said the day after the New Hampshire primary, “[T]he reason she’s a U.S. senator, the reason she’s a candidate for president, the reason she may be a front-runner is her husband messed around.” After a huge uproar, he apologized a few days ago.

Leave it to Drudge to return to it, however indirectly, when he linked earlier this week to a column from The Times of London, headlined, “Oral History: The Monica Lewinsky Scandal 10 Years On.” Before a where-are-they-now rundown of the scandal’s players, the piece offered this perspective: “Ten years on we know what happened to Bill Clinton. He is campaigning tirelessly for his wife as she seeks to win the second Clinton presidency. It is a curious twist of fate, and an indication of how deep were the repercussions of the scandal, that her campaign might not be happening if it weren’t for Monica Lewinsky.”

On Friday, the Washington Post front-paged a piece about Bill Clinton on the campaign trail, glancingly referring to the scandal and speculating that it may be a root cause of much of the anger and frustration he has publicly spouted while stumping. It also quotes him bringing it up himself while campaigning in New Hampshire: “Ken Starr spent $70 million and indicted innocent people to find out that I wouldn’t take a nickel to see the cow jump over the moon … The Republicans were so mean to me when I was president that I was poorer when I left than when I got there.”

Finally, Timothy Noah filed a report in Slate, the online magazine, Friday that examines the curious near-silence about the whole situation and delivers a blow-by-blow recap of the whole thing for anyone who didn’t get their fill of it.

This week’s Democratic presidential food fight, over the rules governing Saturday’s precinct caucuses in Nevada, has been resolved. Short version: Barack Obama won, Hillary Clinton lost.

Here’s the AP’s somewhat longer take on the dispute:

An attempt by Democrats with ties to Hillary Rodham Clinton to prevent casino workers from caucusing at special precincts in Nevada failed in court Thursday.

The ruling by U.S. District Court Judge James Mahan was presumed to be a boost for Clinton rival Barack Obama in the Democratic presidential caucuses Saturday because he has been endorsed by the union representing many of the shift workers who will be able to use the precincts on the Las Vegas strip.

“State Democrats have a First Amendment right to association, to assemble and to set their own rules,” Mahan said. Nevada’s Democratic Party approved creation of the precincts to make it easier for housekeepers, waitresses and bellhops to caucus during the day near work rather than have to do so in their neighborhoods.

The state teacher’s union, which has ties to Clinton, and other plaintiffs brought the suit against the special precincts shortly after local 226 of the Culinary Workers Union endorsed Obama for the Democratic nomination. The union is the largest in Nevada, with 60,000 members. The Clinton campaign said it was not involved in the suit.

The lawsuit infuriated D. Taylor, president of the Culinary Workers Union, who told the Wall Street Journal: “This is the Clinton campaign,” he said. “They tried to disenfranchise students in Iowa. Now they’re trying to disenfranchise people here in Nevada. You’d think the Democratic Party elite would disavow this, but the silence has been deafening.” (The Democratic National Committee belatedly supported the Nevada party’s stance.)

Of all the back-and-forth between the Obama and Clinton campaigns, the choicest was former President Bill Clinton’s lengthy on-camera rant about the whole kerfluffle:

For its part, the Obama campaign fired off a well-spun e-mail shortly after the judge’s ruling:

“We’re glad that the Nevada court upheld the Nevada Democratic Party’s
caucus plan which encourages voter participation. While the Clinton camp
clearly believed the voices of workers should be silenced in service of
their perceived political interest, they enjoyed a twenty five-point
lead two months ago and have much of the party establishment in their
camp. So, despite their inherent advantages we are pleased this should
be a close and competitive contest Saturday,” said Obama campaign
spokesman Bill Burton.

And late this afternoon, the Clinton campaign issued its own version of the decision:

“Nevadans have the opportunity to play a special role in the nominating process on Saturday, and we are thrilled with the energy and support we are seeing across the state. It is clear that Nevadans are excited about participating in this process. While we were not involved in this lawsuit, and have always said that we would play by the rules that we’re given, it has always been our hope that every Nevadan should have equal access and opportunity to participate in the caucus. Make no mistake –the current system that inhibits some shift workers from being able to participate, while allowing others to do so, would seem to benefit other campaigns. More importantly it is unfair. We also are concerned with recent news reports about voter intimidation tactics that would further discourage some Nevadans from participating on Saturday. Our strategy remains the same - we want as many people as possible to participate in the caucus, and we are going to reach out to as many Nevadans as possible in an effort to do as well as possible on Saturday. The Obama campaign has been clear in its belief that whoever wins the culinary union endorsement will win Nevada. We will leave it up to the people of Nevada to make that decision.”

Mitt Romney’s win in Michigan leaves the Republican contest all shook up — and that means that all the leading candidates have a genuine shot at winning the nomination in St. Paul.

Republicans seem to farther away from settling on a nominee than they did before the Iowa caucuses kicked things off. At least back then it was easy — wrong, as it turns out, but easy — to forget Mike Huckabee and to dismiss Sen. John McCain.

Even now, it’s tempting to discount Fred Thompson, who hasn’t managed anything better than third place so far. But then again, he was only one percentage point behind Romney in New Hampshire. And now the race heads South.

Even Rudy Giuliani’s chances appear to grow stronger with each passing election that fails to produce a clear front-runner.

What it all adds up to is this: anything seems possible, and moreso by the day.

Here’s a candidate-by-candidate assessment as we head for the next great mystery in South Carolina on Saturday.

Mitt Romney
A series of silver-medal finishes might actually be the ticket to winning the nomination this year, and now with a decisive win in Michigan, Romney has strengthened his position. Sure, he was born and raised there, but then again he’s been away for decades. And perhaps more important, he won or at least fared well with conservatives and religious voters — two groups that he’s had trouble persuading so far. It’s hard to say where his next win will come. But maybe he doesn’t need another one; maybe he just keeps collecting his silver medals all the way to the top step of the podium in St. Paul.

Sen. John McCain
No question, the Michigan loss was a big blow. He won the state in 2000, but didn’t come close this time, despite carrying the momentum out of New Hampshire. The glimmer of hope in the Michigan results is this: as badly as he lost, he nevertheless won handily among voters who said Iraq was the most important issue and among military veterans. And South Carolina has a larger percentage of veterans than does Michigan. On the downside, South Carolina is also more conservative than Michigan and McCain faltered there in 2000 when he was the victim of a below-the-radar smear campaign.

Mike Huckabee
He’s a southerner, and his appeal to evangelical voters — which jolted the Iowa caucuses — could very well carry the day on Saturday. After New Hampshire, Huckabee conceded Michigan and, as he said last night, planted his flag in South Carolina. On the downside, he’s not the only southerner on the ballot.

Fred Thompson
Could South Carolina be the state that revives the former senator from Tennessee? He’ll have to duke it out with Huckabee, but at least he’s back on more familiar ground. And with the race remaining incredibly fluid and with so many voters making up their minds at the last minute, who knows what chord he might strike, just as Romney did in the closing days in Michigan.

Rudy Giuliani
Giuliani’s national, Super Tuesday strategy is looking more and more plausible. Florida is coming up on Jan. 29, and he’s running neck-and-neck-and neck with McCain, Huckabee and Romney there. And he could win in big states like New York, New Jersey and California on Feb. 5. On the downside, as bsimon noted in a clever comment to an earlier post here, every time Giuliani focuses on a new state, his numbers there go down.

What do you think happens next? Are you ready to eliminate any of them from contention? How and where and when does this all get settled?

And finally, just to recap the race so far, here are the results for the top candidates in each state, with the winner in bold.

The Republicans
……………………….Huckabee……McCain…..Romney
Iowa…………………….34……………13………..25….
New Hampshire………11……………37………..32….
Michigan……………….16……………30………..39….