US Presidential Primaries, 2008

[Gokul43201]

This thread is intended to track the Democratic and Republican Primary results as they come out, but more importantly, for participants to make their predictions before each of the primaries. The main poll above let's you pick more than one option and is about the eventual nominee from each party. Choose one Democratic nominee and one Republican. The poll closes just before Super Tuesday, so there's no hurry to decide right away.

The Iowa Caucus is about a day away from us. Obama, Clinton and Edwards are essentially neck to neck in the Democrats' race. The Des Moines Register opinion poll gave Obama a biggish lead, but most other recent polls have Clinton a few points ahead of Obama. Edwards has been a close third in nearly every poll conducted this last month or so. Among the Republicans, Huckabee's meteoric rise has suddenly flat-lined over this last week or so (may have something to do with the attack ad against Romney) and he is currently in a statistical tie with Romney.

So today we accept predictions for Iowa:

Democrats
1.
2.
3.

Republicans
1.
2.
3.

 

[Gokul43201]

My picks for Iowa:

Democrats
1. Obama
2. Clinton
3. Edwards

Republicans
1. Huckabee
2. Romney
3. McCain

 

[falc39]

Why is Ron Paul left out?

 

[Gokul43201]

He isn't the only one. I've left out all the people that are currently polling below 5% in nationwide polls (I am limited to a maximum of 10 poll choices). Of course, for the individual Primaries/Caucuses, you are free to pick names that are not in the main poll.

 

[Maxwell]

My picks for Iowa:

Democrats
1. Obama
2. Clinton
3. Edwards

Republicans
1. Huckabee
2. Romney
3. McCain

Agreed.

 

[Gokul43201]

For fun, I'm going to make this a competition. You get 2 points for every fully correct prediction, and 1 point for every correct name that is in your top 3, but in the wrong position. The highest possible score for any given Pimary/Caucus is thus 12.

 

[Cyrus]

Its a toss up

Edit: Oops. Can someone undo my voting? Did not mean to select every one!

 

[BobG]

For Iowa:

The biggest surprise will be Ron Paul beating Rudy Giuliani in Iowa. He might even beat Thompson out for fourth. Paul provides some entertainment in that he sets the humiliation threshold.

The best surprise would be Dodds or Biden getting a top three finish, but I don't think either will happen.

Democrats
1. Obama
2. Clinton
3. Edwards

Republicans
1. Huckabee
2. Romney
3. McCain

Overall:

I'm glad we can wait until after the first few caucuses/primaries. Clinton's a shoo-in, but the Republican nomination's going to get real interesting.

 

[BobG]

Its a toss up

Edit: Oops. Can someone undo my voting? Did not mean to select every one!

Are you originally from Florida?

 

[Astronuc]

I think Cyrus is just being very democratic, or he's planning to vote for everyone in every state.

I think Huckabee and Romney will be very close in Iowa, but I suspect they'll go with someone from close by - i.e. Huckabee, but I think Romney is stronger nationally. Someone made an interesting comment this morning that Giuliani is sitting out Iowa, which may lose him points nationally.

On the Democratic side, I think Clinton, Obama, Edwards but Obama and Clinton will be relatively close. Someone commented this morning that Richardson is in this to be VP, but it's hard to tell at this point. I think 28 states will hold caucuses or primaries by the end of Feb, so we should know by then the sentiments of the nation.


Romney criticized Huckabee over a critical remark about Bush. Huckabee indicated that he had not read the NIE, asking why should he be expected to read in 4 hrs when Bush hadn't read it in 4 years.

 

[IMP]

Ron Paul

 

[Evo]

Its a toss up

Edit: Oops. Can someone undo my voting? Did not mean to select every one!

Who do you want to vote for?

 

[Cyrus]

Please, call me chad. I hate to keep hanging around like this though.

 

[Evo]

Please, call me chad. I hate to keep hanging around like this though.

 

[Cyrus]

Read what Bob wrote, it was a bad joke.

 

[Evo]

Read what Bob wrote, it was a bad joke.

For a moment I thought someone else had taken control of your computer.

 

[Gokul43201]

The biggest surprise will be Ron Paul beating Rudy Giuliani in Iowa. He might even beat Thompson out for fourth. Paul provides some entertainment in that he sets the humiliation threshold.

I would actually be a little surprised if Guiliani beats Paul. I don't think Paul will beat Thompson though. But I do expect Thompson will end up pretty close to McCain (maybe even beat him to third place).

Iowa is tomorrow people! We've only got 3 correctly formatted predictions, and they're all the same!

 

[turbo]

No neo-con wants Huckabee and the Republicans are absolutely shocked that the religious base that they claim to love has pushed him to a position of prominence. Neither Clinton nor Obama can win enough votes in the south to claim the general election. Hopefully, Iowans will weigh this and back Edwards, so there is some chance for change in DC. I still will have to hold my nose before I vote for ANY of these candidates.

 

[Cyrus]

My dad was watching the news on tv downstairs today when I walked by. They were asking the candidates what they over induldge in, and the majority of them gave a real PC, BS answer. "I eat too much chocolate."

At least thomson said he sometimes smokes cuban cigars, and one other guy said too much wine.

But seriously, chocolate? Give me something real, like too much booze, too much women, senate pages. Obama said sneaking an occasional cigarette (good answer). Everyone who said chocolate was full of **** in my opinion.

It was hillary and a couple other dopes who said chocolate.

I really don't care for any of the candidates. They all give 'safe' answers and come off as full of stinkin you know what. At least Ron Paul is entertaining, that guy just says whateverrrrrrrr he wants, I love it! Its clear he's nuts, he just doesn't cover it up like everyone else.

 

[binzing]

What did Richardson say he over-indulged in?

 

[Cyrus]

http://abcnews.go.com/WN/Vote2008/story?id=4075745&page=1

Here I found the link. What a crapload of answers for the most part.

 

[Astronuc]

Just to be different

Democrats
1. Clinton
2. Obama
3. Edwards

Republicans
1. Huckabee
2. Romney
3. Thompson

Now Huckabee took off to California to be on the tonight show because he apparently needs more national exposure. I'm not sure who has more national exposure at this point, although Romney might based on the media asking people about his religious affiliation.

Like BobG said, the Republican race will be interesting. Huckabee and Thompson should do relatively well in the South. Not sure were Romney is strong - perhaps the NE.

 

[BobG]

My dad was watching the news on tv downstairs today when I walked by. They were asking the candidates what they over induldge in, and the majority of them gave a real PC, BS answer. "I eat too much chocolate."

At least thomson said he sometimes smokes cuban cigars, and one other guy said too much wine.

But seriously, chocolate? Give me something real, like too much booze, too much women, senate pages. Obama said sneaking an occasional cigarette (good answer). Everyone who said chocolate was full of **** in my opinion.

It was hillary and a couple other dopes who said chocolate.

I really don't care for any of the candidates. They all give 'safe' answers and come off as full of stinkin you know what. At least Ron Paul is entertaining, that guy just says whateverrrrrrrr he wants, I love it! Its clear he's nuts, he just doesn't cover it up like everyone else.

They all miss the boat. Don't they realize that every President over the last 16 years has had much more interesting indulgences? Bush and Cheney could have answered they drank too much. Clinton could have answered sex and marijuana.

In '92, Clinton was just another face in a crowd of 11 Democratic candidates before Gennifer Flowers. Bush 41 had the same opportunity to capitalize on rumors about him and Jennifer Fitzgerald, but he killed the story instead. And Clinton topped it off by admitting he used marijuana. Who won?

In '00, Bush refused to answer questions about drug use before 1974, but also strategically refused to deny drug use. Besides, he had a DUI conviction and Cheney had two DUI convictions as backup. What chance did a goody two shoes like Al Gore have against that?

Obama should have answered cocaine and marijuana himself instead of hoping someone from the Hillary Clinton campaign brought it up. What a sap that guy was - he really misses the boat. He virtually guaranteed an Obama nomination with that blunder. No wonder the Clinton campaign fired him. The only Republican that will have any chance against Obama might be Giuliani.

 

[Manchot]

Clinton's a shoo-in, but the Republican nomination's going to get real interesting.

Why would you say that Clinton's a shoo-in? By most polls, Obama's very close to Clinton in New Hampshire and is ahead in South Carolina. If the Des Moines Register poll is correct (as it usually is) and the Iowa caucus placement is Obama/Clinton/Edwards, this will definitely boost Obama by a few points by virtue of the fact he won, and will likely lead him to win NH and SC. However, this is still not enough, because he could lose on Super Tuesday.

I think the key person to look at is Edwards. There is a segment of the Democratic party that will simply not vote for Clinton, and Obama and Edwards are currently splitting it. If Edwards loses in Iowa, NH, and SC, there is a good chance that he will concede defeat thereafter, automatically giving Obama a large chunk of his supporters and the momentum to win on Feb. 5.

 

[Gokul43201]

Another key person to look at is Paul. Paul is drawing increasing momentum from independent voters, who might otherwise have voted for Obama.

This time round, it looks like there's going to extensive video coverage of the polling.

See for instance: http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/section?category=YOUTUBE

PS: A Zogby/Reuters poll released today has Edwards ahead of Clinton, pushing her to third place.

 

[LightbulbSun]

I've already winnowed out a few of the potential candidates who I will not be voting for in the election, saying they are the nominee of their party.

-Mike Huckabee (He sounds like another George W. Bush, and we all know how the last one turned out.)

-Mitt Romney (Doesn't believe in the separation of the church and the state.)
-Rudy Guiliani (I don't agree with his positions on the issues.)
-Hillary Clinton (There's too much of a facade going on there.)

 

[Manchot]

I won't vote for any of the Republicans. I like my civil liberties, and all of them seem to be in a race to the bottom in this category. The only one who comes close for me would be Paul, but his crazier beliefs make me disinclined to do so. I also won't vote for Edwards, so should he get the nomination, it'll be a third-party candidate for me.

 

[Gokul43201]

No more predictions for Iowa? I find it odd that people are more eager to predict the overall winners (much harder to forecast) than the winners of individual races. We now have 4 people that have turned in Iowa projections (Maxwell, BobG, Astronuc and I), and there's less than 6 hours to go before the caucus opens.

 

[Astronuc]

Now this
1. Obama
2. Edwards
3. Clinton

would make it interesting.

Interesting that Obama may lead SC.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

It looks to me like Obama will win Iowa; and I tend to think by more than the polls are showing.

Reps: Chuckybee