US Presidential Primaries, 2008

  • Context: News 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Gokul43201
  • Start date Start date

Who will be the eventual nominee from each party?


  • Total voters
    68
  • Poll closed .
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
1,347 replies · 183K views
Gokul43201 said:
Astro, BobG: You folks like to make your picks early, dontcha? What's the tearing hurry?
Why wait?

After Michigan, then Nevada and South Carolina. It will be interesting to see how Obama does down south.
 
on Phys.org
Gokul43201 said:
You need to look in a different country then. McCain is the only Republican candidate that supports embryonic stem cell research funded federally, and he belongs to what is arguably the most liberal and progressive church in the country (the Episcopal Church).




1.) McCain is Baptist. McCain has always kept religion to himself which I respect.

2.) I have no problem voting for a moderate Republican since Congress is controlled by the Democrats. I WILL NOT, like a lot of my other fellow Independents, vote for Hillary.
 
Astronuc said:
Michigan
Democratic:

1. Obama (a neighbor)
2. Clinton (more likely than Edwards?)
3. Edwards (progressive)

I'll get back later on the Republicans.
Candidates need to focus on jobs & health care (insurance), retirement & SS, education, and how to get out of Iraq.

Michigan
Republican:
1. Romney (grew up in MI, father 3-time governor)
2. McCain (appeals to workers and middle class)
3. Huckabee (appeals more than the rest)

Nevada:
Democrats:
1. Obama
2. Clinton
3. Edwards (I thought I would make it interesting, but Richardson just dropped out)

Republicans:
1. McCain
2. Romney
3. Huckabee


South Carolina
Democratic:
1. Obama (doing well there)
2. Edwards (homey)
3. Clinton (south will be tough for her)

Republican:
1. Huckabee (appeals to southern evangelicals)
2. McCain (been there, done that)
3. Romney (may not appeal to evangelicals)

AP: Richardson Ends Presidential Bid
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17836744
Should've had an Oprahesque moment.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Don't look now - but NY Mayor Bloomberg Weighs 2008 Run
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17900949


Clinton, McCain Look Ahead to Next Round
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17952255

The woman who asked the question to which Hillary responded with a teary moment voted for Barak Obama. For other women, it was enough for them to decide to vote for the kinder, gentler Hillary, who has been seen as rather stoic up till now.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
It's hard to say what Bloomberg's up to. He certainly gets noticed in the press. He's an independent, more or less. I think he was Dem the switchted to Rep, now pretty much considers himself an independent.

It's interesting that he would compete against Hillary. Gov. Elliot Spitzer is pushing hard for her. He needs to spend his energy on administering the business of the state. :rolleyes:
 
Astronuc said:
It's hard to say what Bloomberg's up to. He certainly gets noticed in the press. He's an independent, more or less. I think he was Dem the switchted to Rep, now pretty much considers himself an independent.

It's interesting that he would compete against Hillary. Gov. Elliot Spitzer is pushing hard for her. He needs to spend his energy on administering the business of the state. :rolleyes:
My take on Bloomberg is that he doesn't want either the Clinton insiders or the neo-cons back in the saddle. I could be wrong about that, but he's got enough money to out-spend everybody else in the field and he may have the savvy (and the independence from donors) to tell petro, pharma, HMO's etc to shove it when they want to continue to run our government. He may be just what we need to roll back decades of corruption and polarization that have made the public good subservient to the profits of the powerful.
 
turbo-1 said:
My take on Bloomberg is that he doesn't want either the Clinton insiders or the neo-cons back in the saddle. I could be wrong about that, but he's got enough money to out-spend everybody else in the field and he may have the savvy (and the independence from donors) to tell petro, pharma, HMO's etc to shove it when they want to continue to run our government. He may be just what we need to roll back decades of corruption and polarization that have made the public good subservient to the profits of the powerful.

I don't know much about him yet, but I do consider him a possible option if Hillary is the Dem candidate.
 
CHARLESTON, S.C. (AP, Jan. 10) - John Kerry, the 2004 Democratic presidential nominee, gave Barak Obama a timely endorsement Thursday, snubbing Hillary Rodham Clinton as well as his own vice presidential running mate.

Kerry came to South Carolina to embrace Obama, two weeks before the state's primary and with Obama needing a boost after Clinton's emotional victory over him in New Hampshire.
Michigan, Nevada and South Carolina will set up the candidates for Super Tuesday. It seems a two way race with Clinton and Obama more or less running tie at the moment.

Romney needs Michigan to gain momentum. I think McCain and Huckabee will do well in SC.

In the November election, Independents will probably be a deciding factor.
 
NH has been huge for McCain! He is now polling nationally at 25-30% (neck to neck with Huckabee), when last moneth he was only at about 10-15%. I wonder if his coffers are starting to fill up too?

Now for some speculation: I wonder how an Obama-Bloomberg ticket might do nationally...
 
Last edited:
Gokul43201 said:
Now for some speculation: I wonder how an Obama-Bloomberg ticket might do nationally...
Interesting. Should appeal to independents, more so than Obama-Clinton.
 
BobG said:
Isn't it about time for the rest of you to get your Michigan predictions in?
Is Hillary Clinton the only Democrat standing now Barack Obama and John Edwards have taken their names off the ballot?? If so then it's Clinton 1 uncommitted 2 :biggrin:

For Republicans
1 McCain
2 Romney
3 Huckerbee
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Michigan
1 Romney
2 McCain
3 Huckabee

Democrat
1 Clinton
2 Uncommited
 
Last edited:
Art said:
Is Hillary Clinton the only Democrat standing now Barack Obama and John Edwards have taken their names off the ballot?? If so then it's Clinton 1 uncommitted 2 :biggrin:

For Republicans
1 McCain
2 Romney
3 Huckerbee

I think Kucinich is still running an invisible campaign (in the invisible primary, no less).
 
Michigan:

1). Clinton

1). Romney
2). McCain
3). Huckabee

The polls are tight, but Romney has been claiming that jobs can be saved, and McCain is saying that the jobs are gone forever. So I will bet that the people of Michigan will go with the positive message that they desperately want to hear.
 
Sorry for getting in this late. Forgot what date today was...been waiting to see if something shook up between Romney and McCain.

Michigan:

1. Clinton
2. Kucinich
3. Gravel

1. Romney
2. McCain
3. Huckabee
 
Michigan Results:

Dem:
1. Clinton 55%
2. Uncommitted 40%
3. Kucinich 4%
4. Dodd 0.5%
5. Gravel 0.3%

Rep:
1. Romney 39%
2. McCain 30%
3. Huckabee 16%
4. Paul 6%
5. Thompson 4%
6. Giuliani 3%

I'm going to award points only for the Republican Primary results for this one.

Points Table:
Code:
            Michigan     Total
Gokul          6          27
Ivan           6          27
Astronuc       6          25 
Evo            6          25
BobG           4          24
Coin                      15
Art            4          12
Maxwell                   8

Next up: Nevada and South Carolina (R) - Jan 19
 
Last edited:
Mike Gravel has to be crushed. Only 3 candidates on the ballot and Gravel finishes 5th. With only 0.3%, he could wind up with negative votes on a recount.

And Giuliani drops to 1-2 against Ron Paul (Edit: Ooops, on the final count, Giuliani manages to edge out Paul so he's 2-1 against Ron Paul).

The thing that amazed me was the number of people that voted in the Democratic Primary. The delegates don't count and only one major candidate was in the race, but around 600,000 voted in the Democratic Primary as opposed to around 800,000 in the Republican Primary. I would have expected that to run around 200,000/1,200,000.

That a made a big difference in the Republican Primay. In 2000, Republicans were a minority in their own primary. In 2008, Republicans made up around 67% of voters in the Republican Primary. The percentage of independents voting in the Republican Primary was down from 2000 as well.

How in the world does the Democratic Primary pull in almost as many voters as the Republican Primary when the Democratic Primary was meaningless? I don't think that bodes well for Republicans.

The other big factor was that Michigan is shaped liked a mitten. I predict Mitt will win every state shaped like a mitten.
 
Last edited:
As for setting up for Super Tuesday, estimated top spenders so far are:
opensecrets.org said:
1. Romney - $53 million
2. Obama - $44 million
3. Clinton - $40 mil
4. Giuliani - $31 mil
5. McCain - $30 mil
6. Edwards - $18 mil
7. Richardson (out)
8. Dodd (out)
9. Biden (out)
10. Thompson - $6 mil
11. Paul - $3 mil
12. Kucinich - $2 mil
13. Hunter - $2 mil
14. Huckabee - $2 mil
15. Gravel - $ 0.3 mil
16. Keyes- $0 mil

Can these possibly be up to date and reliable? I know Huckabee's been running his campaign on the cheap, but surely he isn't being outspent by Paul, Kucinich, and Hunter.

Money left in their campaign funds (I know this isn't up to date because it doesn't include 4th quarter fundraising which hasn't been released yet).
opensecrets.org said:
1. Clinton - $50 mil
2. Obama - $36 mil
3. Giuliani - $17 mil
4. Edwards - $12 mil
5. Romney - $9 mil
6. Thompson - $7 mil
7. Paul - $5 mil
8. McCain - $3 mil
9. Huckabee - $0.7 mil
10. Kucinich - $0.3 mil
11. Hunter - $0.1 mil
12. Gravel - has to bum bus fare back home
*excludes candidates that have dropped out

I doubt these are very accurate, but accurate enough to get an idea of the candidates' strategies and potential problems. Money's important, but it's only important you're not totally swamped by your opponents money (well, except in the case of Huckabee vs. Romney - maybe you can't buy me love).
 
South Carolina
1. McCain
2. Huckabee
3. Thompson

Nevada
Republican:
1. Romney
2. McCain
3. Thompson

Democrat:
1. Clinton
2. Obama
3. Edwards

Most .... political ad in South Carolina: Tied Up
Didn't see that coming: Reagan Democrat
Mmmmm, good!: Fried Squirrel
The BlendTec tested endorser: HuckChuckFacts

How is it that Mike Huckabee succeeds as the candidate most likely to be the creation of a Saturday Night Live skit?
 
Last edited:
South Carolina
Rep:
1. McCain
2. Huckabee
3. Romney

I'm going against the markets on #3.

Nevada
Rep:
1. Romney
2. McCain
3. Giuliani

Dem:
1. Obama
2. Clinton
3. Edwards

Going against conventional wisdom (Huck) for Rep#3 and Dem#1,#2. For the Dems, I'm expecting the outcome of the Teachers' Union lawsuit to have some small negative blowback for Clinton which would not have shown up in recent polling.
 
South Carolina
Rep:
1. McCain
2. Huckabee
3. Romney

Nevada
Rep:
1. Romney
2. McCain
3. Huckabee

Dem:
1. Clinton
2. Obama
3. Edwards
 
Seems like Romney has won Nevada. As a as a former Utahn with some knowledge of Moromon weirdness, anyone know why he moved to Mass with such a inheritance of politacal bounty in Mich? Too midwest for a guy with presidential leanings early on and wanting to mitigate a Midwestern/LDS background?
 
BobG said:
South Carolina
1. McCain
2. Huckabee
3. Thompson

From what I've heard this morning, it could be

1. Huckabee
2. McCain
3. Thompson

In the south, it seems Huckabee and McCain will have a close contest with the possibility with Thompson edging out Romney.


I think Romney gets Nevada, and the race between Obama and Clinton is close. I guess Edwards will hang in until SuperTuesday.