I know that Bush's opponents like to paint him as dull-witted, but he keeps outwitting their leadership. What does that say about Harry Reid and Nancy Pelosi?

I will make a very early prediction regarding elections a year from now: Democrats will nominate Hillary, who will then lose the general election; however, Democrats will remain in slight control of Congress.

Bush has successfully maneuvered the political debate over to traditionally Republican strengths, namely fighting terrorism and controlling spending. No, Bush doesn't have any real credibility on controlling spending, but that's more than Pelosi or Reid have. The House just spent about a week threatening to pass a resolution that would upset a key ally and disrupt our supply lines in Iraq, turns out that was a bad strategy. They've also tried to expand S-CHIP to cover groups outside of any reasonable definition of "low income." And while a majority of Americans -- including President Bush -- support expanding the program very few support expanding it that much.

And all this time, they have failed to get very far on the budget. Even so, a year from now, I expect the Democrats to hold on to their Congressional majorities. I'm not sure about whether they will keep the same leadership, though. But in the end, Hillary has too many negatives to get very far in the general election. There is documented evidence that she spied on political rivals under President Clinton. Try to square that with her position on FISA. "Spy on politicians, not terrorists"? Likewise, the more moderates get to know her, the less they like. Overall her candidacy will not be pretty.