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
Sign up Log in
1,347 replies · 183K views
Evo said:
Yep, I have an entire jar full of lire that I forgot to exchange. As money, they are worthless, but they look nice. :frown:
One day, they may be the only Lire left, so 1000 years from now, they'll be priceless. :biggrin:



BobG said:
I did Evo's, Astro's, and Ivan's, as well.
Awww, thanks Bob!
 
on Phys.org
Astronuc said:
So who will be McCain's VP? Huckabee? Anyone else?

I could see Huckabee because he'll attract the southern and perhaps more socially conservative folks.

Huckabee is the first name that comes to mind that would work for both McCain and the VP candidate. But, I'm telling you, it's just bad luck to have Huckabee in your line of succession.

Romney and Giuliani would be bad choices, though. McCain can't seriously believe either would flip Northeastern states from Dem to Rep, anymore than Kennedy's endorsement swung Massachusetts from Clinton to Obama.

Bill Owens of Colorado or an Ohio Republican might come in handy, considering both will probably be swing states.

Why not Jeb Bush as VP? That would help big time in Florida. And wouldn't that be an interesting thought as VP for a 72-year-old candidate.
 
Things are going to get dicey. Clinton wants to seat Michigan's delegates because she was the only major candidate who left her name on the ballot, and she wants to seat Florida's delegates because she did well there, and denied that she campaigned there because she only attended functions that were not open to the public (learned that hair-splitting from Bill, I guess). A fair way to seat the delegates from those states would be if the states agreed to ignore the results of their primaries and hold caucuses to choose delegates, but Clinton will not benefit from such an arrangement and will probably fight it. Dean and the DNC leadership will have to take the lead on this one. The Dems in those states disenfranchised themselves by defying the DNC and moving up their primaries, but the Dems in those states deserve to have their voices heard in a convention that is as tight as this one looks to be. In states that held caucuses as opposed to primaries, Obama did quite well, so I expect vigorous opposition from the Clinton camp to this type of compromise. Can anybody come up with something fairer?
 
The Democratic Party really stuck themselves on this one.

Somehow, they've managed to set up a situation where they could completely self-destruct in a year when a Democratic victory has to be considered practically certain.

We started with a splintered Republican Party and five candidates threatening to run the nomination into a bitter convention fight, yet it winds up with an early Republican nominee getting a head start on a dead heat Democratic battle, complete with a Florida election controversy.
 
Last edited:
Hey, no one answered my question: How did you know that Huckleberry would do so well in the south? Did I miss some polling data or punditry, or were those just good guesses based on the large Evangelical population?
 
Good analysis of Romney's campaign (except how could he not think of a campaign that so lost its way less than two weeks after Giuliani dropped out - $50 million dollars for one delegate?)

I would have seriously considered him before his campaign actually started. His big problem is that he occupied much the same niche as Giuliani and there's no way he could compete against Giuliani even in the Northeast.

If he runs next time around, I'd expect him to run more as the guy that was governor of Massachusetts than as a pseudo Ronald Reagan.

Edit: I still think Giuliani could have won the nomination if he had $60 billion to spend. That would have netted him 1200 delegates, giving more than enough for the nomination.
 
Last edited:
Ivan Seeking said:
Hey, no one answered my question: How did you know that Huckleberry would do so well in the south? Did I miss some polling data or punditry, or were those just good guesses based on the large Evangelical population?

The large evangelical population. I'm surprised Huckabee didn't do better in the rest of the country after his winter surge and performance in Iowa. Publically pulling his efforts out of an expensive state like Florida in the morning on the same day that Thompson finally dropped out in the afternoon was a blow. It broke the public momentum he had and that was a critical blow to a campaign that never had money from the start.
 
Ahh, the Dems. Always snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Rooting for the Democrats is like rooting for the Cubs, sometimes.

There will be mayhem in the common ranks of the party if the Clintons think they're going to count Michigan and Florida, without re-voting. But if it remains as close as it is now, they might have to do just that.

The Republicans in my state choose about half their delegates at caucus, the other half in a primary. If the Dems did that in Michigan and Florida, it would take away any advantage either candidate would have with either system.
 
lisab said:
Ahh, the Dems. Always snatching defeat from the jaws of victory. Rooting for the Democrats is like rooting for the Cubs, sometimes.
Yep! The party exhibits little loyalty or discipline and generally manages to give the GOP lots of ammunition to attack them with.


lisab said:
There will be mayhem in the common ranks of the party if the Clintons think they're going to count Michigan and Florida, without re-voting. But if it remains as close as it is now, they might have to do just that.
I certainly hope not. All the Dems pledged not to participate in those primaries, and Clinton reneged both times in a manner "just" oily enough so that she could feign innocence.

lisab said:
The Republicans in my state choose about half their delegates at caucus, the other half in a primary. If the Dems did that in Michigan and Florida, it would take away any advantage either candidate would have with either system.
This sounds like a fair compromise, but such a system would have to be developed in a very short time, and since it would be new to both states (without previous experience and safeguards to prevent rigging) I would be leery of the validity of the results. At least at a caucus (like in my state) you get together with a bunch of politically aware/active people from surrounding communities, and basically argue the good points and weaknesses of the candidates, and horse-trade influence until you've selected a candidate for your delegate to vote for. It's the kind of situation in which you can transcend feel-good sound-bites from the candidates and assess their electability. You may be very taken by a candidate's position on one or more issues, but if your discussions with your neighbors convince you that another candidate is more electable, it's best to show some cohesion with the party and throw your support to the candidate that has a chance in the general election.
 
turbo-1 said:
Can anybody come up with something fairer?

Thumb wrestling. Or maybe a pet cockroach race. Wishbone?
⚛​
 
CaptainQuasar said:
Thumb wrestling. Or maybe a pet cockroach race. Wishbone?
⚛​
Rock, paper, scissors - best of 9.
 
Jon condenses more than six hours' worth of Super Tuesday tedium and refuses to be pigeonholed as part of a special interest vote.
http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml?videoId=156229&title=super-hump-day

Quote of the day: "Voters like to vote for who they like." Wow - what insight!

Jon shuffles through the colors assigned to the candidates and compares the gadgets of the cable news teams.
:smile:


And don't miss "The best political team - ever!" :rolleyes:

or the Comedy Central 's contribution to this years election coverage (if you get tired of the network coverage)

http://www.indecision2008.com/videos.jhtml?cat=candidate
 
Last edited:
BobG said:
Why not Jeb Bush as VP?

Wash your mouth out with soap and say 10,000 Hail Mary's and 10,000 Our Father's for that one! Next, please clean up the mess left after my head exploded.
 
Coming up this weekend: Louisiana, Nebraska, Washington and Maine (Ya mon, I'm leavin' out them Virgin Islands!)

Lousiana
Dem=
Rep=

Nebraska
Dem=

Washington
Dem=
Rep=

Maine
Dem=

I've left out the recent Rep Caucus in Maine, which was closed as will be the Rep Caucus in Kansas.
 
Will someone please post their choices for tomorrow, so I can copy off of them?

Dem= Clinton
Rep= McCain

Nebraska
Dem= Obama

Washington
Dem= Obama
Rep= Huckabee

Maine
Dem= Clinton
 
Last edited:
Kansas caucuses

Republican
1. McCain
2. Huckabee
3. Romney


Louisiana primaries
Dem
1. Obama
2. Clinton
Rep
1. Huckabee
2. McCain
3. Romney

Maine
Dem
1. Obama
2. Clinton

Nebraska caucuses
Dem
1. Obama
2. Clinton


Virgin Islands caucuses
Dem
1. Obama
2. Clinton


Washington caucuses
Dem
1. Obama
2. Clinton

Rep
1. McCain
2. Romney
3. Huckabee
 
Last edited:
BobG and Gokul, if you want your stats to hold, pick Obama to win in the Maine caucuses. Clinton has got a phone-bot campaign running here, and frankly, that pisses people off big-time. Obama has been doing well in caucuses, because his supporters are motivated and well-informed, and a lot of them are younger folks who want to see a change - not just Clinton, Clinton, Bush, Bush, Clinton...
 
The last polls I saw had Clinton with a big lead in Maine, but I've been expecting that Obama's since closed it. Some blogs have been talking about an Obama win, but I haven't seen any recent polls yet. That's why I wanted to give myself a little time to do some digging.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
There have been quite a few polls since January that show that if the Dems nominate Clinton, she loses to McCain or maybe just pulls out a squeaker. The same polls show that Obama would beat McCain by maybe 6-10 points.

(CNN) — It's a question both Hillary Clinton and Barack Obama have raised since John McCain's initial surge in the polls: Which Democrat can best take on the Arizona senator in a general election match-up?

A new Time magazine polls seems to suggest the answer is Obama.

The poll, conducted over the three days leading up to Super Tuesday, shows Obama beating McCain by 7 points, 48 percent to 41 percent. Clinton ties McCain at 46 percent.

The difference between the two candidates, according to Time, is where the Independent vote goes: The poll indicates a larger share of those voters will chose to support McCain over Clinton than McCain over Obama.
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/

If Dems attending the caucuses and primaries take these poll numbers seriously, there may be a swing toward Obama, because Super tuesday turned out to be a wash, and electability has to be factored into the choices at the polls. Clinton has the highest negatives of the three, followed by McCain, with Obama a distant third. This is important when you figure that no candidate can win the general election without swaying a majority of the independents.
 
Yesterday Obama was in Washington [the State] and drew a crowd of something like 26,000!

A couple of pundits commented [Washington Week] that in many cases this is more than the combined total of people showing up to see the Republicans; even when we had five or more candidates.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

News Reaction to Trump winning the 2016 US Presidential Election
  • StatGuy2000
  • · Replies 12 ·
  • General Discussion
Replies
12
Should I Vote for the Lesser of Two Evils in the US Presidential Election?
  • jobyts
  • · Replies 40 ·
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
40
News Who Will Win the 2008 US Presidential Election?
  • BobG
  • · Replies 78 ·
  • General Discussion
3
Replies
78
News Ahmadinejad offers to be an observer at US presidential election
  • fourier jr
  • · Replies 8 ·
  • General Discussion
Replies
8
News Why are presidential primaries not all on one day?
  • wasteofo2
  • · Replies 14 ·
  • General Discussion
Replies
14
  • Poll Poll
News Did the 2000 US Presidential Election Have Illegal Activity?
  • russ_watters
  • · Replies 28 ·
  • General Discussion
Replies
28
  • Poll Poll
News Predict the US Presidential Election Winner!
  • Gokul43201
  • · Replies 51 ·
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
51
  • Poll Poll
News What Will the Voter Turnout Be in the Upcoming US Presidential Election?
  • check
  • · Replies 10 ·
  • General Discussion
Replies
10
  • Poll Poll
News Was the 2004 US Presidential election rigged?
  • russ_watters
  • · Replies 50 ·
  • General Discussion
2
Replies
50
C/C++ Print US Presidential Election Years Since 1792
  • ineedhelpnow
  • · Replies 4 ·
  • Programming and Computer Science
Replies
4