Noam wonders below about independent voters in Michigan. But what about those famous New Hampshire indies? With John McCain creeping back up in the polls, there's been talk about the possibility that he might recapture his old glory in New Hampshire, where he stunned George W. Bush in 2000. But wait!, said George Will on ABC's "This Week":

But remember it's no longer his place. In 2000 he lost the Republican portion of the Republican primary. He won because independents are allowed to vote in there and in 2000 that's where the action was. In 2008 the action - the more interesting fight will be in the Democratic [primary].

At first I found myself nodding along--you know how reasonable that nice Mr. Will can sound--until I realized that he's got it backwards: Hillary is crushing Obama in New Hampshire. If she wins Iowa decisively the race is basically over; no independent looking for "the action" will bother voting Democratic. Meanwhile, the GOP primary is only getting more interesting. According to Will's theory, I would expect to see independents flocing to influence the Republican race, not the Democratic one. So the more important question is not whether many independents will vote Republican--but whether any of them still see in John McCain any of what they so loved back in 2000. But, contra Will, I don't think open-primary dynamics are his problem. P.S. A likelier explanation might be that the GOP-leaning independents who supported McCain are too disgusted with the Republicans to vote in their primary, regardless of where their vote will have more sway. I'd love to see some numbers on that. --Michael Crowley