Yesterday's victories by Clinton in Nevada and McCain in South Carolina have me thinking about what an election between the two would look like. I like aspects of both candidates, and each represent elements of the establishment that have not been in power for the last 8 years.

Historically the Republican who wins the South Carolina primary also wins the party's nomination. Hillary on the other hand has now won two states in a row, New Hampshire and Nevada, when the polls predicted a Barack Obama victory. Clearly both of these candidates have momentum, and will gain even more speed if Hillary can pull off another upset in South Carolina, and if McCain place higher than Giuliani in Florida.

If this is going to be an election about change, it's interesting to see establishment candidates emerge who can both represent reform and also protect the status-quo. The balance between the need to seduce an electorate fed up with beltway bullshit, yet protect the real power that owns and runs the country.

I like John McCain because he is genuinely an honest politician, and I support his positions in favour of campaign finance reform and against torture. However McCain is what you'd call a "hawk," someone who is effectively pro-war. It's not that he's a nut-job like Bush, but rather that he's a war hero (surviving captivity in North Vietnam), comes from a military family, and understands the inherent and unquestionable role of the armed forces in the governance of the country.

Hillary Clinton is similar, in that she also balances elements of change, with intimate ties with the establishment. However, unlike McCain, Clinton is not honest, or at least she doesn't come across that way, and she doesn't have the same type of connection with the military.

As the first female President, Hillary would be under a lot of pressure to not come across as weak, and will probably do things like Bill Clinton did, such as lob missiles at vague enemies. Her record as a Senator has put her more on the "hawk" side, however the hope is that, as President, her foreign and domestic policy would be far more moderate than other candidates. Health care strikes me as a key initiative that is far overdue that she would most certainly work towards (once again).

The American economy appears to be heading for a serious downturn, and the focus on economic issues will be especially interesting if the race narrows down to McCain vs Clinton.

In the face of pro-war McCain, will Clinton back off her opposition to the war and tone down talk of withdrawal? If the economy becomes the dominant electoral issue, will that hurt Obama's call for change or help it? How will the competitive Republican race be affected by the official declaration of a recession?

What strikes me as interesting aspect of a McCain vs Clinton election is that the war would almost become a non-issue. Not that the electorate wouldn't see it as an important issue, but if both candidates decide not to focus on it, then the war continues, and all eyes go to the economy. Unfortunately, while the war machine is the modus operandi for the US government, the trillions being wasted in Iraq point rather ominously toward bankruptcy.