Every New Year’s Day, political pundits make predictions for what lies ahead in the next 12 months – and 2008 is no exception. But with the top 3 Democrats running neck-and-neck in Iowa, the only certainty is that the outcome tomorrow will be very close -- and nobody is bold enough to predict what will happen. I am ready, however, to say that Barack Obama will finish first, making him the front-runner for the presidential nomination. While various polls make the result just about anybody’s guess, the Des Moines Register’s final poll (which accurately predicted the outcome four years ago) has him ahead by seven points. Obama got a further boost yesterday when Dennis Kucinich formally asked his supporters to pick him as their second choice, and Joe Biden hinted that he might do the same. Pundits have long said that Obama would benefit the most from a very high turnout – and with the race so close, the field campaign so intense and the outcome so critical, voters will be coming out in droves.

I’ve followed politics long enough to know that a campaign is desperate when they start attacking a poll’s methodology. Which is what both the Clinton and Edwards campaigns did on New Year’s Eve – just as the Des Moines Register released its poll with Obama at 32%, followed by Clinton at 25% and Edwards at 24%. Joe Trippi, who works for Edwards, said that the poll over-counted first-time caucus goers – and that it could only be accurate if we have a huge turnout. Clinton’s campaign complained that the poll included too many independents and Republicans (who are allowed to participate in the caucus), and pointed out that she leads among registered Democrats.

Unstated was that as far as Iowa polls go, the Des Moines Register generally has the best reputation. Its final poll result in 2004 right before the Iowa caucus had John Kerry in the lead, followed by John Edwards, and Howard Dean a distant third. But let’s assume that the poll over-counted the number of non-Democrats who will attend the caucus: is this the best point that the Clinton campaign wants to make? Iowa Democrats put a very high premium on electability, and Clinton has claimed that she knows best how to win the general election. Wouldn’t Democrats want a candidate like Obama with cross-over appeal? Isn’t picking up support among non-Democrats the very essence of electability?

I think that the Register poll slightly exaggerates Obama’s lead, but that he is still ahead and will win the caucus tomorrow. And if we’re going to objectively question the poll’s accuracy, it is only fair to look at where it also downplays Obama’s advantage. As political columnist David Yepsen reported, the poll slightly undercounted young voters. 17% of Iowa caucus voters in 2004 were under the age of 29, but the Register poll only had 17% of its respondents under 35. “Obama's people have always said that the youth vote would be gravy on his victory,” said Yepsen, “and they are.”

Unlike traditional state primaries, the Iowa system favors candidates who have 2nd-choice support – especially among minor candidates who don’t reach 15% at the precinct level. Obama got a boost yesterday when progressive candidate Dennis Kucinich urged his supporters to caucus for Obama if he fails to reach the viability threshold. Kucinich did the same thing for Edwards four years ago, which helped him surge to a surprising second-place finish. While not doing so formally, Senator Joseph Biden recently told the Washington Post that he would “probably” cut a deal with Obama as well.

The Kucinich factor will have a bigger impact than we think. While he’s only polling at 1% right now, many progressives who have written off Kucinich as a fringe candidate are nevertheless swayed by his endorsement. It gives Obama a certain “stamp of approval” that he and Edwards have been seeking as they run to Clinton’s left. If Joe Biden, who is more moderate and has run on his foreign policy experience, likewise urges supporters to pick Obama as a second choice, Hillary Clinton is in deep trouble. That might be enough to put her in third place behind Edwards.

Finally, Barack Obama will win Iowa because we will have unprecedented turnout. Observers agree that a low turnout benefits John Edwards, because he is most popular among regular caucus goers. A moderate turnout helps Hillary Clinton, because she is relying upon women and elderly voters who are less likely to vote – but are still more likely than young people. But a high turnout will boost Obama’s chances because he is relying heavily on first-time caucus goers, especially youth. And all indications say, besides a good weather report, that turnout will be historic.

People are motivated to vote if (a) they are excited about the outcome, or (b) the race is so close that their presence could be decisive. Here, we have both. The Democratic field is the most exciting we have seen in a long time – and voters are eager to end the Bush Administration and pick a new President. With polls showing either Clinton, Obama or Edwards in the lead – and most are within the margin of error – the average Iowan would be crazy not to vote tomorrow. And with the crop of Republican presidential candidates so uninspiring, independent voters who can attend either caucus are more likely to hit the Democratic side. As mentioned above, a large turnout of independents will help Obama.

When the Des Moines Register poll numbers came out on Monday night, Joe Trippi – who managed Howard Dean’s campaign in 2004, and now works for Edwards – disputed the results. “You’d have to have 220,000 people voting for that poll to be right,” he told the New York Times. “If that’s what’s going on, there’s no historic model for it. I was the guy here last time who thought we would have 200,000 people. It didn’t happen.” But it will happen, because this time it’s not just hard-core Democratic partisans who are motivated to vote. Bush has turned off independents as well, and they will choose to vote in the Iowa Democratic caucus. And that’s why Obama will win tomorrow.

Send feedback to paul@beyondchron.org