THE NOTE: Poll Position:

Jan. 1, 2008 -- DES MOINES, Iowa --

You know you were at a terrifically fun yet terribly important New Year's party if, shortly after 10 pm ET (9 pm in wind-chill-whipped Iowa), everyone stopped looking at Dick Clark (or Howard Wolfson or David Axelrod or Gentry Collins or Ed Rollins) and started scrolling on BlackBerries.

The last pre-Iowa numbers that mean anything at all are certain to shape perceptions, expectations, and overall mood in the final sprint to Iowa. Yes, the same folks who are blasting the methodology would be trumpeting the victory if they were on top.

But before we let this mean too much, the more important question to ask: Is Sen. Barack Obama acting like he's confident that he's seven (!) points up on Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton? (No.)

And does former governor Mike Huckabee look like a man who's secure in the knowledge that he's six points up on former governor Mitt Romney? (No, but with Huckabee, now the undisputed owner of the most bizarre, surreal, can't-make-this-stuff-up moment of the cycle, it's probably best to give up guessing what's going through his mind).

For the Democrats, it's Obama 32, Clinton 25, and former senator John Edwards on her heels at 24 (and single digits for the rest) in the Des Moines Register poll. But there are plenty of reasons to think this doesn't mean a whole heck of a lot:

"Roughly a third of likely caucusgoers say they could be persuaded to choose someone else before Thursday evening," Tom Beaumont writes in the Register.

"All of the three leaders in Iowa draw a majority of support from new caucusgoers, although Obama benefits the most with 72 percent of his support coming from first-timers compared to 58 percent of Clinton's and 55 percent of Edwards' supporters."

Among the GOP, it's Huckabee 32, Romney 26, and Sen. John McCain (in prime position to be the other Iowa "winner") at 13. Yet here comes the sprinkling of salt on icy Iowa:

"The poll shows there remains enough indecision among likely caucus participants to scramble both the race for first place between Huckabee and Romney, and the battle for third," Jonathan Roos writes. "Nearly one-half of caucusgoers say they could still be persuaded to support another candidate."

David Yepsen's take: "Huckabee appears to have fended off a last-minute surge from Mitt Romney. After a tight race for months, Obama seems to be opening up a last-minute lead over Hillary Clinton and John Edwards."

But then the caveats: "Undecideds exist." "Last-minute developments won't be reflected." "Some support is soft." "A lot of caucus-goers are first-timers."

More caveats (and the Clinton and Edwards campaigns of eager to point them out): "Obama supporters are very heavily independents, and the DMR predicts 40% independents and 5% Republicans will caucus -- a stunningly high share compared with past caucuses, and likely reflecting Obama's powerful appeal to the center," Politico's Jonathan Martin writes. "Clinton, meanwhile, leads among Democrats."

And a bigger caveat comes in the form of the CNN/Opinion Research poll: Clinton 33, Obama 31, Edwards 22. GOP side has it at Romney 31, Huckabee 28.

There's a very real chance that Thursday night will not bring clarity, despite those fancy high-def monitors that will display caucus results inside the Polk County Convention Complex.

"Aides are beginning to grapple with the frustrating possibility that all the time, money and political skill invested here might prove to be for naught when it comes to identifying the candidate to beat in the primaries and winnowing the top tier,"

Adam Nagourney writes in The New York Times.

"If Iowans end up being equally divided among what many party leaders view as an unusually strong cast of candidates, who is to say that voters in the Feb. 5 states won't be as well?"

More important than any numbers, the sense of urgency/uncertainty coursing through the chilly Iowa air is infecting the putative front-runners in these first hours of 2008.

And leave it to the candidate no one saw coming to cram something new into a political year that had already seen everything. Huckabee, R-Ark., faced down what had to be the largest collection of media folk he'd ever seen on Monday and promptly did one of the oddest things in caucus history.

ABC's Jake Tapper has the just plain weird sequence of events: "The stage was set for Huckabee to show his new anti-Romney TV ad. The backdrop read 'Enough is Enough!' Nine times. Charts detailed contradicting Romney quotes on abortion, taxes, immigration, guns, and judicial nominations. And, of course, a big screen was present to unveil the new Huck-a-spot. The Baptist minister did not look to be planning to turn the other cheek. But then, he announced he was not going to run the ad."

"Quite a convenient epiphany," AP's Ron Fournier writes. "If he loses Iowa's caucuses, New Year's Eve will forever mark the day Huckabee blew it -- the day a crowd stopped laughing with the witty Republican and laughed at him. If he wins -- a possibility that even Huckabee now thinks he put at risk -- he sealed victory in a weird way Monday."

"Cynical laughter coursed through the room," the Chicago Tribune's Mike Tackett writes.

"Everyone was trying to get this straight. He had the negative ad. He wanted everyone to see the negative ad. Then he wanted everyone to know that he had personally ordered that the negative ad be withdrawn, hopefully before it was ever aired."

Here's why it matters: "Instead of becoming more disciplined in the face of battle, Huckabee and his campaign have veered off in directions that have not helped his message," Michael Shear and Perry Bacon Jr. write in The Washington Post.

Says GOP strategist Scott Reed: "Poor Huckabee has gone from being a principled conservative candidate to a political analyst who can't make a decision on strategy."

(And/but . . . as Jennifer Rubin notes in her American Spectator blog, this is getting far more derisive play nationally than it is locally.)

To attack ads and non-attack attack ads, we add the attack non-ad. (Got that?) Yes, Huckabee gets everyone to talk about his attacks without having to fully own them (or spend a precious dime on getting them in the mix).

But Huckabee may have gotten more than he bargained for by trying to play Mr. Nice Guy but adding a Huck of a caveat.

By pseudo-attacking -- and the bootlegged ad that will never be will surely live forever on YouTube and cable networks -- he's allowing Romney, R-Mass., to reclaim the high road he abandoned weeks ago.

"I'm running a positive campaign," Romney declared Monday, as he unveiled a closing ad that's all smiles from Mitt, ABC's Matt Stuart reports. A bit of confidence (though this was before the Register poll results were released): "I think I'm going to win."