For years New Hampshire’s special (first) primary status has been defended by the theory of “retail politics.” That is, if we grant the “serious” New Hampshire voters the privilege of becoming more intimately acquainted with the candidates–in diners, homes, and the like–they’ll make a more informed decision and get the primary season off on the right foot. Consequently, presidential candidates spend a hugely disproportionate amount of their time and resources campaigning in New Hampshire (and Iowa).
So how effective was all that time spent in New Hampshire this time around? Here’s this, from the New Hampshire primary exit poll:

When Did You Decide Your Vote?
Today (17%)
Last Three Days (21%)
Last Week (10%)

So, despite months of being wooed by door-to-door canvassing and town hall meetings, nearly half (48%) of the voters didn’t decide who to vote for until the last week.
It makes you wonder what all the fuss was about.

With oil prices at $100 per barrel, people are concerned about the “high” cost of gasoline. That’s understandable, because a typical household with two commuters can shell out a lot at the gas pump.
But viewed comparatively, as Matthew Simmons often notes, gasoline is relatively cheap. At $3/gallon, gas costs less than 20 cents per cup. That’s less than coffee, milk, or even bottled water. And you can certainly do a lot more work with a cup of gas than with a cup of milk.
The problem is that we burn a lot of it. Motor vehicles are a rather wasteful means of transportation. First, the internal combustion engine is only about 20% efficient in converting energy into work. Second, drivers typically move thousands of pounds of extra (unnecessary) weight with them as they go. Think about it–in many (most?) cases when you get in a car or truck, you simply want to get yourself from point A to point B. And yet the vehicle requires you to haul all that metal with you.
Imagine you could harness the energy from gasoline into what may be the most efficient of vehicles: the bicycle. Suppose you could drink gas and convert its energy into work. How many miles could you travel per gallon?
A quick Internet search offers some widely-varying estimates. This Wikipedia entry says 653 miles per gallon. But this site says 912 miles per gallon. That’s quite a discrepancy–one I assume is largely due to the assumptions on riding style used in the estimate. The energy required to travel on a bike varies according to how fast you are going (wind resistance) and the type of tires you have (rolling resistance).
For the heck of it, I’m going to calculate how far I could go on a gallon, based on typical riding characteristics. [Warning: I’m not a science guy, so this exercise is fraught with mathematical peril.]
First, I must determine how much energy a gallon of gas contains.
One U.S. gallon of automotive gasoline = 125,000 BTU/gallon
One BTU = 1055 joules
So one gallon (125,000 x 1,055 ) = 131,881,987 joules (per this converter).
Next, I determine how much work that energy can perform.
According to some experiments, the human body is 25% efficient in converting ingested fuel into useful mechanical energy.
So I could theoretically get (0.25 x 131,881,987) = 32,970,497 joules from the gas.
1 joule = 1 watt-second
Thus 32,970,497 joules = 32,970,497 watt-seconds
How much power do I consume while riding? This site lets you calculate it based upon your ride characteristics. Mine are as follows:
Racing bicycle with hands on top of the bars
Rider’s Height 70 in
Rider’s Weight 160 lb
Bicycle Weight 21 lb
Air Temperature 65 F
Height above Sea Level 980 ft
Slope of Road 1.5%
Wind Speed 3 mph
Pedaling Cadence 80/min
Narrow, high-pressure racing tires
Speed: 18.0 mph
With the above data the calculator indicates that under “typical” riding conditions, I need 330 watts of power.
Thus, 32,970,497 watt-seconds / 330 watts per second = 99911 seconds
99911 seconds / 3600 seconds per hour = 27.75 hours of riding
27.75 hours x 18 mph = 499.5 miles
So I estimate that if I could consume gasoline, a gallon of the fuel would allow me to ride 499.5 miles, given my typical riding.
That would be much easier on the wallet, as it’s farther than I can go with an entire tank of gas in my Honda.
If I wanted to get even more bang for my buck, I could simply ride slower. If I reduce my speed in the above equation to from 18 mph to 13.8 mph, I could ride 632 miles.

Candidate George W. Bush:

Bush In 2000: Bush Blamed Clinton Administration For High Gas Prices; Promised “Immediate Relief” By Using His “Capital” With Saudis And Kuwaitis. “Campaigning for president in a state particularly hard-hit by high gasoline prices, Texas Gov. George W. Bush on Tuesday blamed the nation’s predicament on the Clinton administration, which he said is operating without an energy policy. “This is an administration that is hoping the issue goes away,’ Bush said. … ‘The vice president seems to forget who’s been in office for seven years,’ Bush said. ‘This is an administration that has been in charge, and the price of gasoline has risen steadily since they’ve been in office.’ Asked what he would do as president to address the price at the pump, Bush said he would confer with oil-producing allies and ask them to pump more crude. ‘I would use the capital my administration will earn with the Kuwaitis or the Saudis, to convince them to open up the spigot,’ Bush said. ‘That’s where we will get immediate relief.'” [Houston Chronicle, 6/28/00]

Or, if conferring didn’t work, there was this:

In December 1999, in the first Republican primary debate, Mr. Bush said President Clinton “must jawbone OPEC members to lower prices.”

So how well has jawboning worked?
Average price for a barrel of oil in 2000 (inflation adjusted): $33.15
Intra-day price yesterday: $100
Of course your view on oil price is shaped by your perspective. Here Matthew Simmons and Jan Stuart discuss the price of oil and offer their short-term outlook:

The Energy Information Administration (U.S. Department of Energy) has released a preview version of its Annual Energy Outlook 2008. A highlight:

In the AEO2008 reference case, real world crude oil prices (defined as the price of light, low-sulfur crude oil delivered in Cushing, Oklahoma, in 2006 dollars) decline gradually from current levels to $58 per barrel in 2016 ($70 per barrel in nominal dollars), as expanded investment in exploration and development brings new supplies to the world market. After 2016, real prices begin to rise (Figure 1), as demand continues to grow and higher cost supplies are brought to market. In 2030, the average real price of crude oil is $72 per barrel in 2006 dollars, or about $113 per barrel in nominal dollars.

$58/barrel in 2016 (a 38% decrease from today)? I’ll take the over.
The report cites increased production as a reason for the decrease. But, as Richard Shaw notes, much of the new production that will be coming online has a much higher break-even price. So even under a best-case scenario, it’s hard to imagine that long-term oil prices would drop that far (barring a world-wide depression).
On a related note, here’s an interesting 2005 UK documentary on peak oil. It’s about 50 minutes long; lots of good information.

According to TV news, one of the weighty questions political experts are wrestling with is the impact that the holiday season will have on the early state primaries/caucuses. Because election calendar has been crammed forward this season, we have an unusually short gap between Christmas, New Year’s Day, and the first elections. In the reports I’ve seen the issue is typically framed in terms of the candidate’s campaigns: How do the holidays alter how the candidates run their campaigns? Will voters pay attention to their messages the last week of December.
My sense is the holiday break may have a marginal impact on the Iowa outcome, but won’t make a difference for the later states. The primary reason I think it might have an impact on the Iowa caucuses is because they come just two days after New Year’s Day. Hence some potential voters (e.g., college students) are still going to be on vacation instead of voting. That could make a difference in a real tight contest.
As for the holidays affect on the candidates connecting with voters, I don’t think that’s a significant issue. Think about it–many of the candidates have all but lived in Iowa for the past six months. If a voter is still undecided at this point, it’s not because he or she hasn’t had a chance to become familiar with the candidates–it’s because he or she doesn’t want to commit to someone. A few more campaign stops isn’t going to make a difference. The “undecideds” simply need to get off the fence.