News US Presidential Primaries, 2008

[Ivan Seeking]

California:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = McCain

New York:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = McCain

Illinois:
Dem = Obama
Rep = McCain

New Jersey:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = McCain

Georgia:
Dem = Obama
Rep = McCain

Massachusetts:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = Romney

Missouri:
Dem = Obama
Rep = McCain

Tennessee:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = McCain

Arizona:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = McCain

Minnesota:
Dem = OBama
Rep = McCain

Colorado:
Dem = Obama
Rep = Romney

Alabama:
Dem = Obama
Rep = McCain

Connecticut:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = McCain

Oklahoma:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = McCain

Arkansas:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = Huckabee

Kansas:
Dem = Obama
Rep = ------

Utah:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = Romney

New Mexico:
Dem = OBama
Rep = ------

Idaho:
Dem = Obama
Rep = ------

Delaware:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = McCain

North Dakota:
Dem = OBama
Rep = McCain

Alaska:
Dem = Obama
Rep = Ron Paul

 

[Gokul43201]

My picks:

California:
Dem = Obama
Rep = McCain

New York:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = McCain

Illinois:
Dem = Obama
Rep = McCain

New Jersey:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = McCain

Georgia:
Dem = Obama
Rep = McCain

Massachusetts:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = Romney

Missouri:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = McCain

Tennessee:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = McCain

Arizona:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = McCain

Minnesota:
Dem = OBama
Rep = McCain

Colorado:
Dem = Obama
Rep = Romney

Alabama:
Dem = Obama
Rep = McCain

Connecticut:
Dem = Obama
Rep = McCain

Oklahoma:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = McCain

Arkansas:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = Huckabee

Kansas:
Dem = Obama
Rep = ------

Utah:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = Romney

New Mexico:
Dem = OBama
Rep = ------

Idaho:
Dem = Obama
Rep = ------

Delaware:
Dem = Clinton
Rep = McCain

North Dakota:
Dem = OBama
Rep = McCain

Alaska:
Dem = Obama
Rep = McCain

PS: Montana and WV for Reps are closed caucuses and will not be included.

 

[Astronuc]

NEW YORK (CNN) – Former Arkansas Gov. Mike Huckabee won the West Virginia State Party Convention, the first Republican presidential nominating contest of “Super Tuesday.”

Huckabee was victorious on the second ballot.

Huckabee picked up 18 national convention delegates after trailing former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney on the first round of balloting. It appeared as though supporters of Arizona Sen. John McCain, who placed a distant third on the first ballot, moved over to Huckabee, helping him to carry the day.

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...ins-first-super-tuesday-presidential-contest/

So for the Reps, it was

1. Huckabee
2. Romney
3. McCain

 

[Gokul43201]

I would have bolded the next clause in that excerpt. Everyone knows that the GOP insiders hate McCain, and that Romney is their poster child. Huckabee himself is only popular among a medium sized, uberconservative wing. The interesting thing here is that the McCain gang went over to Huck so Romney wouldn't win the state.

Are all closed conventions "winner take all"?

 

[Astronuc]

Everyone knows that the GOP insiders hate McCain, . . .

No kidding!

McCain faces conservative backlash
http://www.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/02...h/index.html?eref=rss_politics&iref=polticker

(CNN) -- GOP front-runner John McCain is cruising into Super Tuesday with a hefty lead in the polls, but he's drawing a backlash from some top conservatives who say he is too liberal to carry the Republican nomination.

Are all closed conventions "winner take all"?

Not sure.

 

[BobG]

And already reports of voting problems.

[In Virginia]..the State Board of Elections had received hundreds of calls by noon, many from people wanting to know why their polling places were closed.

Oh, wait! Virginia's primary is next week on Feb 12. Doh!

 

[Astronuc]

And already reports of voting problems.

Oh, wait! Virginia's primary is next week on Feb 12. Doh!

Well, at least they're eager to vote! Maybe in 4 years, Virginia will have joined Super Tuesday.

I think it was McCain or Romney who told their supporters, "Go out and vote as many times as you can." - then realized the implication of what he just said.

 

[Astronuc]

Anxiety over jobs, economy crowd out war, other issues

It's particularly acute in states where housing has cratered and unemployment is higher.

Economy worries in focus as voters cast ballots

SAN FRANCISCO (MarketWatch) -- In a change from prior years' presidential primaries, anxieties about jobs and eroding housing wealth have pushed out war, health care and hot-button social issues as the No. 1 subject in voter's minds.

Voters heading to the polls in 24 states Tuesday are instead expected to pay more attention to candidates' positions - or posturing - on solving economic challenges facing the United States today.

"Job insecurity, the difficulty with financial markets and the risk of a spillover to the rest of the economy, will play a central role," said Dimitri Papadimitriou, president of the Levy Economics Institute at Bard College.

That's particularly the case in states where the housing market has cratered and unemployment rates are shooting higher.

Take California, the biggest prize in terms of delegates. It ended 2007 with a 6.1% unemployment rate, more than one percentage point higher than the national average.
Foreclosures more than tripled last year, while home prices in Los Angeles and San Diego have been dropping by double-digit percentages. As if to underscore the state's increasingly precarious financial position, California Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger unveiled a $14.5 billion-budget shortfall.

"The economy, both on the Democrat and Republican side, has become really a front-and-center issue in the California primary," said Mark Baldassare, president of the Public Policy Institute of California, in San Francisco.

 

[turbo]

Here's a reason to vote for Obama if you don't want McCain continuing Bush policies:

Sunday's Washington Post/ABC poll shows Obama defeating McCain 49%-46% while McCain beats Clinton 49%-46%. Sunday's Cook Political Report/RT Strategies poll shows Obama defeating McCain 45%-43% and McCain defeating Clinton 45%-41%. Both polls give Obama a 6 point advantage over Clinton in a match-up with McCain.

These most recent polls are consistent with numerous polls taken over the past year, most, but not all, of which show McCain defeating Clinton. A January 10-12 Financial Dynamics poll shows McCain defeating Clinton 48%-45% and Obama defeating McCain 43%-42%. A December 12-14 Zogby Poll shows McCain defeating Clinton 49%-42% and Obama defeating McCain 47%-43%, a 10 point advantage for Obama over Clinton.

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/miles-mogulescu/obama-likely-to-defeat-mc_b_85009.html

 

[Moonbear]

http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.co...ins-first-super-tuesday-presidential-contest/

So for the Reps, it was

1. Huckabee
2. Romney
3. McCain

Keep in mind that in WV, that was a Republican CONVENTION, not a primary election. Our primary isn't until May (the Republicans can have an actual vote on a whopping one-third of the delegates for their party, since the other 2/3 got wheeled-and-dealed to a candidate they really didn't want today).

On the upside, when I got confused hearing results for WV on CNN tonight, and rushed to the SOS website trying to figure out what was going on, I was pleasantly surprised to learn that since the last time I checked their website for primary election information, they've changed the rules so now "No Party" voters can vote in the primary. Hmm...at the rate things are going, I might have to vote for a"Mountain Party" candidate. Yep, apparently we have one.

 

[Gokul43201]

Obama with a 10 states to 6 lead over Clinton. Zippity doo dah!

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Clinton took Ca.

 

[Astronuc]

Montana - 649,436 total registered voters (No registration by party)

Romney   625 38% (25 del)
Paul     400 25%  
McCain   358 22%   
Huckabee 245 15%

They're really excited in Montana.

 

[Astronuc]

Paul did better than McCain in Alaska

Romney   5,126 44%  12 
Huckabee 2,548 22%   6 
Paul     1,955 17%   5 
McCain   1,804 15%   3

Not too many Dems in Alaska, or they live in Ca for the winter.

Obama    302  75%  9 
Clinton  103  25%  4

 

[BobG]

Going into Super Tuesday, Romney was saying that Huckabee shouldn't still be in the race - all he was doing was spoiling Romney's chances. On the surface, McCain finished second in 4 of the 5 states Huckabee won, but I think Romney still has a case. It would be a stretch to say Romney would be winning or even tied against McCain without Huckabee in the race, but I think Romney could have been a lot closer; maybe as close as within a 100 delegates - more because of close states like Missouri that McCain won than the states Huckabee won. Most likely case would be a very solid lead for McCain, but close enough to say you still had a race.

I don't think you could make the same claim for Huckabee. He'd be closer and he might have won a couple of close states like Missouri and Oklahoma. If Romney wasn't in the race, you'd have a big batch of delegates up for grabs, but it would be hard to say Huckabee would have an advantage over McCain in winning those delegates.

The real reason McCain's thumping Romney and Huckabee is the delegate rules in the various states. If you had the same rules as the Democrats, the Republicans would be locked in a 3-way race that would be virtually guaranteed to run into the convention.

McCain won 6 winner-take-all states and Romney 4, but McCain won 305 delegates in his winner-take-all states while Romney won only 119. Plus McCain won 2 states, Oklahoma and Illinois, that were virtually winner-take-all, even if the losers in those states picked up a few token delegates. Oklahoma went 37%-33%-25%, yet McCain picked up 32 delegates to Huckabee's 6 and Romney's 0. The rules in Illinois and Oklahoma were good for another 84 delegates for McCain.

Romney won 7 states, but 3 of them were good for a net gain of 16 delegates over McCain - less than the smallest of the winner-take-all states.

Huckabee won 5 states, but only 2 were winner-take-all, plus Georgia which virtually a winner-take-all state. He won 85 delegates in those states. Winning Alabama netted Huckabee 1 delegate over McCain, while Tennessee netted him 7 over McCain.

The state total (excluding California) was McCain 8, Romney 7, and Huckabee 5, but that was a landslide victory for McCain once the different delegate rules are taken into account. In significant victories, McCain won 8, to Romney's 4, to Huckabee's 3. McCain's significant victories were more significant (more delegates). He won 389 delegates in his, while Romney went 119 and Huckabee went 85.

 

[Evo]

Current delegate count

Democrats need 2,025

Clinton 845

Obama 765

Republicans need 1,191

McCain 613

Romney 269

Huckabee 190

 

[denverdoc]

Here's a reason to vote for Obama if you don't want McCain continuing Bush policies:


http://www.huffingtonpost.com/miles-mogulescu/obama-likely-to-defeat-mc_b_85009.html

It was a curious pattern IMO out west--in states like Colorado, ND, Idaho, Utah all of which run crimson red to purple, Obama stomped Clinton, meanwhile losing to her on the coasts. (Going southwest and in California, poor support by latino voters for Obama seems to have hurt.)

I can see many quasi-independent voters including myself possibly going for McCain vs Clinton, whereas I would vote Obama over anyone else.

 

[BobG]

It was a curious pattern IMO out west--in states like Colorado, ND, Idaho, Utah all of which run crimson red to purple, Obama stomped Clinton, meanwhile losing to her on the coasts. (Going southwest and in California, poor support by latino voters for Obama seems to have hurt.)

I'll say it was a curious pattern, at least for the Democrats. They shot my picks in the PF 2008 FLFFTNODBTVPCIASBSB all to heck. And after I did so good on the Republican side.

 

[Gokul43201]

Clinton took Ca.

I'm waiting to see how many pledged delegates she makes.

California has the "62.5% rule". In any county where the winner does not get 62.5% of the vote, the delegates are shared equally. If Clinton won every county by the same 52-42 margin, she would end up with the same number of pledged delegates as Obama.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I was ticked that I didn't review the other votes here before dismissing Huck in the South. If I had looked, your votes might have clued me in.

Were there poll numbers foretelling his victories in the South? I'm thinking that I checked for Romney and McCain and forgot about Huckleberry.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I'm waiting to see how many pledged delegates she makes.

California has the "62.5% rule". In any county where the winner does not get 62.5% of the vote, the delegates are shared equally. If Clinton won every county by the same 52-42 margin, she would end up with the same number of pledged delegates as Obama.

To me the most significant factor was her pull with Latinos. It seems that even Kennedy couldn't break this bond.

She also did very well with young voters.

It is odd: I would love to see Obama win, but suddenly I am convinced that there is no way that he will, so I can't get too excited about the voting. I am all but certain that Hillary will be the next President and I expect to see a Clinton-Obama ticket.

If it comes down to a close race, which appears to be the case, then the superdelegates will decide the election. In that case the Clinton machine wins.

 

[lisab]

To me the most significant factor was her pull with Latinos. It seems that even Kennedy couldn't break this bond.

She also did very well with young voters.

It is odd: I would love to Obama win, but suddenly I am convinced that there is no way that he will, so I can't get too excited about the voting. I am all but certain that Hillary will be the next President and I expect to see a Clinton-Obama ticket.

If it comes down to a close race, which appears to be the case, then the superdelegates will decide the election. In that case the Clinton machine wins.

I wish the Dems would get rid of superdelegates!

But as far as who will win the candidacy, it's far from over. It could even be undecided right up to the convention. But even if that happens I don't expect to see a Clinton-Obama (or vice-versa) ticket. Sad to say, there are people who would never vote for a woman, and others who would never vote for a black man. Why run a ticket that would exclude the union of those groups?

I don't see Clinton winning against McCain. Elections are decided by Independents, and McCain will pull more of those votes than Clinton.

But I think Obama could get a significant slice of the Independents' votes. And some Republican cross-overs as well - I don't see Clinton getting any of those (despite Ann Coulter's endorsement!).

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I think you are missing the obvious point: With Obama on the ticket, the dems will pull McCains votes. There will be tremendous pressure on Obama to help ensure that this happens.

I have never seen so much enthusiasm for one, much less two dem candidates - not since Kennedy.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

This may be the most important stat of all from last night. Hillary and Obama each got far more votes than McCain did; I think by about 5 million to 3 million.

 

[BobG]

I think you are missing the obvious point: With Obama on the ticket, the dems will pull McCains votes. There will be tremendous pressure on Obama to help ensure that this happens.

I have never seen so much enthusiasm for one, much less two dem candidates - not since Kennedy.

I don't think many voters care who the Vice Presidential candidate is outside one key state or another. Otherwise, how could you explain Spiro Agnew and Dan Quayle?

Of course, the exception would be McCain. Voters might not vote for McCain because they like his VP nominee, but with his age and health, I imagine he could pick a VP that would positively terrify voters.

Which makes the current status of the Republican race hard to explain. McCain supporters in West Virginia team with Huckabee supporters to deny Romney a victory. Huckabee trashes Romney constantly and never says a bad word about McCain (although, to be fair, just about every candidate hates Romney). The Republican establishment is more scared of Huckabee than they are McCain.

An interesting note: Huckabee became Lt Governor because the governor moved to White House, elevating Clinton's Lt Gov to Governor. Huckabee moved from Lt Governor to Governor when the Governor (Clinton's replacement) had to resign due to the Whitewater scandal. Replacing a deceased McCain as President would just be the next logical step in Huckabee's career.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

I don't think many voters care who the Vice Presidential candidate is outside one key state or another. Otherwise, how could you explain Spiro Agnew and Dan Quayle?

Don't you remember, Dan Quayle is like Kennedy! BushI was just riding Reagans tail.

Unless you have someone like Reagan who is 100% electable on his own, the VP can be critical - there are even standards for who to pick [which I'm sure that you know]. In a divisive race like this I think Obama would be critical to victory. And I for one am willing to assume that no one as smart as Hillary would task someone as smart as Obama with the typical mundain duties of VP. I would expect him to play an active role in the admin.

 

[Ivan Seeking]

Did you all hear the crowd go nuts when Wolf Blitzer suggested the Dream Team?

Frankly I think the dems would be nuts to pass on this opportunity. Davie Gergen even suggested that this is a real liablity for Obama because the voters will see the opportunity to get two for the price of one... well, if we include Bill we get three for one. And I see no way that an Obama-Clinton ticket would work.

 

[denverdoc]

I don't think many voters care who the Vice Presidential candidate is outside one key state or another. Otherwise, how could you explain Spiro Agnew and Dan Quayle?

Of course, the exception would be McCain. Voters might not vote for McCain because they like his VP nominee, but with his age and health, I imagine he could pick a VP that would positively terrify voters.

Which makes the current status of the Republican race hard to explain. McCain supporters in West Virginia team with Huckabee supporters to deny Romney a victory. Huckabee trashes Romney constantly and never says a bad word about McCain (although, to be fair, just about every candidate hates Romney). The Republican establishment is more scared of Huckabee than they are McCain.

An interesting note: Huckabee became Lt Governor because the governor moved to White House, elevating Clinton's Lt Gov to Governor. Huckabee moved from Lt Governor to Governor when the Governor (Clinton's replacement) had to resign due to the Whitewater scandal. Replacing a deceased McCain as President would just be the next logical step in Huckabee's career.

Agreed, McCain will want to allay any fears he isn't conservative/religious enough. The Huckster might work, if he could talk Huck into it. There tho is a fine line, none of the evangelicals is likely to jump parties, and McCain must be careful not to alienate the moderate reps/independents who might be seriously torn.

 

[turbo]

Now that Obama and Clinton are in a statistical dead-heat, this would be an opportune time for Edwards to endorse Obama in return for the VP slot. That pairing could be hard to beat in the general election. A southern white, a northern black, both with some progressive ideas and none of Clinton's baggage.

 

[denverdoc]

Turbo,

I like that idea much better than so-called dream team, as Obama notes, Clinton is a smaller subset of Obama's when it comes to votes from the middle. I see that he may actually be on top after yesterday when all is said and done, and certainly not trailing by 90 or more delegates .