File your entry for the Political Forecaster of 2008
January 6th, 2008
Who is going to come out top this year?
Politics in the first few days of 2008 has already burst into life with the Iowa caucuses - so what will happen in the rest of the year? Back by popular request, test your forecasting skills once again with the PBC prediction competition.
Due to the likely number of entries, the competition this year will be in spreadsheet format, which will mean that collating and marking can be greatly speeded up (there were over 3000 items to mark in the 2007 competition).
The spreadsheet can be downloaded below - there are 23 questions in 4 sections.
Do not post your answers in the thread below - please email your completed spreadsheet to pbpredcomp@yahoo.co.uk
If you don’t have access to Excel, these links may be helpful:
Mike Smithson
Paul Maggs
MessageSpace Advertising
For the May seat losses question do these include Wales?
I bottled the US Veep question - let’s be honest, no one’s got a clue
2 is that plea for help?
2 - I think if Obama wins, VP may well be Edwards. My entry did not have Obama winning though.
Technically of course for question 4 no-one will be elected US President in November, and won’t be until January. Ditto the VP.
4 This was mentioned on Daily Kos and other Democrat blogs last night - I really cannot see it happening.
Edwards didn’t really help Kerry - he was a one term Senator, so is almost as inexperienced as Obama. He doesn’t win you states, he doesn’t appeal to a constituency that Obama couldn’t win without him (or that other people couldn’t help with more), and he would mobilise massive hostility from business. Edwards, like Webb, would be a massive mistake for Obama.
I have no absolutely idea who the Veep will be. So I had a laugh - and put down Oprah. I expect to get an extra 10,000 points if correct!
6 A southern Governor would be a good choice, executive experience and comfort to southern Democrats.
Bill Richardson wants the job too much, and I think the democrats will take the Hispanic vote anyway.
6. I agree that Edwards would be a bad choice for Obama (or Clinton) as VP; and his leftwing rhetoric makes him an unlikely choice in any case. Obama, if he wins the nomination, should choose someone with governing and foreign-policy experience, as those are his weakest areas - which leads me to think those who point to Bill Richardson might be on to something.
If Clinton wins, she’d just want someone with plenty of charisma, preferably from the South. Like… Bill Clinton, perhaps!
I’ve got absolutely no idea on local election gains/losses - is it right to see the scale of the event as being about one third that of last year? (ie several hundred gains or losses being absurd for 2008?)
re 9 but despite what Rod said the other day about the 22nd amendment only preventing someone from being “elected… more than twice” to the office of president, doesn’t this very clause make him “constitutionally ineligible” according to the 12th amendment.
There are 144 years between these two amendments and the writers of the 12th probably had no concept of limiting a presidential term to 8 years but undoubtedly if they had they would have considered this a constitutional ineligibility too. One for the Supreme Court no doubt if it ever happened.
10 There are only around 1/5th of the seats being fought in 2008 compared to 2007
7 - hey, Gordon offered Fiona Phillips a place in the government, so why not VP Oprah?
Because Gordon’s an idiot and Obama isn’t?
Not filled out the form yet, will probably do it tomorrow. Does the winner get some sort of prize, a shiny trophy of year’s supply of Jack Daniels, perhaps?
Of = or a
Treacherous fingers…
9 and 11 - 22nd Amendment doesn’t directly apply thanks to specifying “elected”, but I think SCOTUS would take a dim view of obvious circumvention (though they were less concerned in refusing to hear Jones v Bush)
Beyond VP, there is a law informally called the ‘Bobby Kennedy Law’ which was passed in 1976 prohibiting the President from appointing members of his (or her) direct family to Cabinet Posts (RFK was JFKs Attorney General, thus the name of the bill). This only includes Cabinet Secretaries, but not other attendees (National Security Advisor, WH Chief of Staff). The Secretary of Defence may not have served in the military above the rank of Colonel in the previous (I think) 10 years (which is why Colin Powell took State perhaps), but again could be NSA (ie Wes Clarke for DoD is a no-hoper).
8 - Dems do *not* have a lock on the Hispanic vote. Not in Florida (Cuban Americans), not amongst Protestant Hispanics, and certainly not if they choose Obama (Hillary leads Obama by 55% to 6% on average - antipathy between Hispanic Americans and African Americans is a major issue in many parts of the US).
9. I’m definitely running with Richardson for VP, even on an Obama ticket (I know he was touted as a running-mate for Hillary, but seems to have been tacitly supporting Obama recently, if rumours from Iowa are true, and Hillary and Obama, as Senators, both have the same issues).
Richardson is Southern, hispanic, and has an *executive* background as opposed to a soley *legislative* background. This would balance the ticket with a nominee from the Senate well.
Plus, if Obama gets the nod, he gets three other plusses: all the Clintonistas who are upset that they won’t get the Bill and Hillary show back in the White House would have a link with the past in Richardson, in that he was a member of Bill’s administration. This would nicely link the two Democratic administrations whilst still allowing the main candidate to shout ‘change.’ Secondly, having been in a UN role he negates the possible Republican attacks that the Democratic ticket is weak on foreign policy. And thirdly, being older than Obama he can be painted as the ’steadying hand.’
So yep, Richardson would be a good choice (though if the Dem candidate is in power for two full terms, it would be interesting to see if he stepped into the breach at 68, almost as old as Regan, to fight the election.). I have no idea on the Republican front. No idea whatsoever.
I just also want to say that Edwards as VP again is a no-no, or should be (I think he’s angling to be part of an Obama ticket, though). He didn’t work wonders in 2004 up against a very unpopular President. I think someone else deserves a chance (and I don’t think the Dems need someone with a Senate background as VP, seeing as the nominee will have that already).
13 - I was trying to think of a female who Obama could appoint to VP, which would truly embrace a new politics. But there do seem to be very, very few women in US politics. Hilary (rival), Condi Rice (wrong party), Nancy Pelosi (Speaker) - er, that’s about it for those who register with me.
Oprah can turn a never-heard of book to best seller with one recommendation. People hang on her every word; and she is probably trusted by more people than any politician.
FWIW, I did put down Richardson as Hillary’s VP as I had Hillary down to win.
SBS on last thread:
161. I tend to agree that the other energy companies will follow. I have been surprised that the Oil price etc has not spiked inflation more in the last 3 years. Interest rate decisions will be finally balanced between sustaining jobs and growth or disinflation. Hopefully things will recover or not deteriate to much.
As for me i trained as a Mortgage advisor and then whilst looking for work started on financial adviser exams. This is why i do not come on very often as i work long hours now! I foresaw the housing market problems and thats why i moved into the more general financial advise field. I have now got the best paid job i have ever had and recieving further extensive training and i work for a very good company.
19. If I remember rightly, Michael Moore proposed the idea of a President Oprah in his 2001 book, ‘Stupid White Men’, arguing that she would make the perfect candidate. It would be hilarious if it actually happened… and yet, somehow, I doubt it.
1. SScrew all VP speculation (unless of course you’re a gambling addict). Complete waste of time at this stage: first things first!
2. Wyoming GOP Conventions getting little coverage in Sunday papers, just obligatory story. BTW, only numbers being reported are DELEGATES so while combined Delegate-Alternates is a fairer measure (thanks to way thing was organized in WY due to RNC taking away have the delegates because of pre-NH timing) always keep your eyes on delegate count.
3. Speaking of that, Clinton is CURRENTLY leading Obama in SUPERDELEGATES that is elected & top party officials. BUT if Obama starts eating up the turf, then strangely enough he will pick up support with the supers - gee, wonder why???
4. Forget what you think or I think or what some crazed blogger think: question today is, what is the mainstream media telling NEW HAMPSHIRE LIKELY PRIMARY VOTERS today, Monday and Tuesday morning?
5. Saturday night shootout has done little or nothing to change campaign tragetory, save to give Romney another kick and (perhaps) to have prevented a Hilary NH meltdown (which really wasn’t in the cards, given she does have a solid if hardly overwhelming base within the Democratic Party.
6. Clinton campaign insiders have already abandoned any hope they had in a NH firewall; whatever some of you punter may be thinking THEY do NOT believe the polls that say the race is a dead heat. Instead, Hilary has for all intents and purposes adopted the Rudy Giuliani Big State stratey. Meaning that both will live or die based in FLORIDA.
7. Don’t think it’s sunk into many of your think Saxon skulls what Obama’s Iowa victory means to Democrats and Americans on a gut historical/cultural level. Even people who don’t like Obama have been moved by seeing a Black man win DECISIVELY a state that is 95% White. A tall, thin, gawky Midwesterner, standing tall and saying: “We are not Blue State and Red States, we are the United States of America.” Just as a previous Illinoisan once stood tall, thin and gawky and said: “A house divided cannot stand.”
Check this link out (for Jan 6) for great Seattle Post-Intelligencer editorial cartoon by David Horsey to see what I’m taliking about:
http://seattlepi.nwsource.com/horsey/viewbydate.asp?ID=1688
19. Kathleen Sebelius is probably the best female VP choice for Obama; she’s the governor of Kansas. Not going to swing her home state, of course, but extremely popular across the board and an experienced and reassuring executive. She is by no means a shoo-in, however.
After tonight’s debate, I think Richardson is back on the list of possibilities. I had previously crossed him off because he’s a really poor speaker; he is, but he’s obviously angling hard for the job, and there really is no potential VP candidate more experienced than Richardson in the United States. I have been a Richardson supporter, and I could definitely endorse him teaming up with Obama.
As for other possibilities, I’ve listed some before, but here is my list of others for Obama: Joe Manchin, Jay Rockefeller, Blanche Lincoln, Ted Strickland, Evan Bayh. Joe Manchin is Governor of West Virginia. Jay Rockefeller is a Senator from West Virginia and former Governor of West Virginia. Blanche Lincoln is a Senator from Arkansas. Ted Strickland is Governor of Ohio and a former Representative. Evan Bayh is a Senator from Indiana and former Governor of Indiana.
12,
Thanks, Mark.
As the transfer window is now open ,at least for footballers, perhaps the name of John Prescott may be touted as V.P.
A classic double act
Obama’s Iowa Victory - Impact on Black America
New York Times ran an interesting piece on this yesterday. Range of quotes by African Americans across US, ranging from college professors to store clerks.
Here is perhaps the most interesting:
“At the Bessemer Flea Market near Birmingham [Alabama}, Jasper V. Hall, 69, said: “I was hoping he didn’t win; I didn’t want him to get shot.’”
“Mr. Hall, an electrical worker who said he changed his party affiliation from Republican to support Mr. Obama, added, ‘Hopefully he can win and stay alive.’”
“He said he felt Mr. Obama was the candidate who best represented him and understood his struggles.”
“‘You know that ceiling’ Mr. Hall said. ‘You’re not going to see it flashing back at you, but you know it’s up there. No matter how good, how smart, how much money you have. You’re going to see that ceiling that’s going to reflect and stop you.’”
“‘It’s the same ceiling that gets poor people, Hispanic people. It’s the same ceiling. I’m ready for someone to break through that ceiling.’”
24 Mike, thanks for that. Kathleen Sibelius is obviously doing a poor job promoting herself or her State here in the UK!
23 - thanks for the post, very informative.
Just one point I wouldn’t mind clearing up. Forgive my ignorance [due to other commitments, my study of US politics has been set aside for the last 6 months], but I thought the situation with Florida rendered it less relevant to the main Democratic contenders?
21 - I think inflation was eased by the energy companies cutting prices by about 15% last summer.
Good luck to you on financial adviser exams, Martin. I never worked as an adviser by did loads of exams (9 I think in total)over the last 8 years in that field, as it was useful for my work, and helped me get some good projects. But those days are behind me now…
23 - Florida is meaningless for the dems isn’t it? No delegates there means that the vote is no measure of anything beyond a ‘what if?’.
They’d never try and give back the delegates later, it would be like telling a football team that the friendly they just played was actually for real. It could cause ructions later though if it is close.
US PRESIDENTIAL SATURDAY NIGHT DEBATES
OBAMA
best: first part of the debate (after which huge sections of audience switched channels) where he was on even par with Clinton & Richardson (just doing that on foriegn policy was very helpful)
worst: convoluted discussion of lobbyist perks; unconvincing minutia
CLINTON
best: strong tough self defense along with graceful answer when asked about fact that people just like Obama’s personlity better; plus agreed with Edwards, she really did look great appearance-wise.
worst: “I’ve been making change for 35 years” which not only focused upon the PAST but she repeated this phrase several times which both sounded shrill AND like she was dispensing coins at a car wash; her hubby would have said “making change HAPPEN” and would have ditched the 35 yrs in favor of the present and esp. FUTURE tense.
EDWARDS
best: when he was charged up talking about fighting for people like his daddy and grandmother.
worst: sucking up to Obama (which won’t signify, chances of VP are nil, Americans like retreds even LESS in 21st century than in 20th)
RICHARDSON
best: discussing his wide ranging experience, esp. diplomatic, in way that looked forward, not backward; also “I’ve seen hostage negotiations that were more civil” line
worst: didn’t really have any, pretty much flawless from his perspective, which is to get out of NH with a few percentage points AND remain a strong VP contender.
24 - Excellent commentary BUT note that KS Gov Sebelius has unfortunately been politically wounded by a scandal involving the KS AG, a Democrat formerly a Republican who was recruited by Gov. Sebelius to switch parties and run for AG. This was part of self-purge of moderates from the Kansas GOP over “creative design” and suchlike. The scandal: AG admitted to an affair with coworker and was forced to resign.
So scratch Sebelius from your dance card, which is a shame.
Must say I’m gratified by M(NJ) listing two West Virginians in his VP possibles: Gov. Manchin and Sen. Rockefeller. Both would help the ticket in WV (especially Manchin) and Rockefeller has foreign cred. BUT neither has a hope realistically; Machin is a total unknown outside WV, while Rockefeller is not exactly what you’d call a great ball o’fire on the stump. As for Evan Bayh, a very appealing candidate, but Indiana ain’t in play and he’d cut zero ice elsewhere methinks.
Gov Strickland of Ohio on the other hand is a much better bet. Because the Buckeye State is again going to be absolutely critical to the outcome. And because Strickland is a good campaigner, with strong appeal to RURAL Ohio which would help ANY Democratic nominee a great deal. In my humble opinion, the reason that Gore lost in 2000 and even Kerry in 2004 was the collapse of Democratic support among rural voters in traditionally Democratic areas - West Virginia being a prime example; nobody in Scioto County, Ohio OR Wood County, WVa thinks Ted Strickland is going to take THEIR guns away!
32 Thanks SSI - Excellent summary, which is to say it’s pretty much what I thought!
31 Forget all the nonsense about seating or not seatting delegates. This is just happycrap, only real issue is how many eager Dem activists get seats on the convention floor this summer. Believe me whoever wins this thing (which will happen by March at very latest unless things get SERIOUSLY weird) will be sure to sort the whole thing out so that each state gets it’s proportional number of tickets.
The real issue: is your name on the ballot? Think that Obama, Clinton, Edwards & Richardson are all on FL ballot. So it will indeed be a race.
There’s another Republican debate tonight on Fox if anyone wants to see Mitt pummelled again.
Question for people: what time are the primaries likely to start and finish on Tuesday night? I’m hoping I can get more sleep this time given that NH is on eastern time…
Its so depressing to spend a while wading through the news pages in the US to come up with Richardson as VP then to find nearly everyone else on here going for him too!
35 Good point SSI. Appears that in Florida all names are on the ballot although no campaigning is going on. Fundraising doubtless continues though…
In Michigan however, they are not on the ballot - only Clinton, Kucinich, Dodd and Gravel are on. Paddy Powers are now offering 4/7 on Hillary to win most votes in Michigan. The Michigan Democratic Party is telling people to vote “uncomitted” if they don’t like any of the names on the ballot, rather than write in a name, so the 4/7 would seem great value.
38 - But no campaign means that the result is not a true representation, any attempt to reverse the decision would not be democratic in any way shape or form.
38. Yep, I won’t hold it against Mike for encouraging me to back Obama in Michigan when his name isn’t even on the ballot paper!
36: Oh, you wicked temptress. I might even allow myself to watch Fox just for the delicious treat of seeing Rancid Romney getting a good kicking (verbal kicking of course, although one can but dream….)
re 40. Henry - my apologies, I have a bet on as well.
Just looking at last night’s video clips again what knocked me out was Obama’s response to Hillary’s comment “You know, words are not actions. As beautifully presented and passionately felt as they are, they are not action.”
Barack replied “The truth is, actually, words do inspire, words do help people get involved, words do help members of Congress get into power.”
He is in a different league
US PRES - SAT DEBATE - GOP
HUCKABEE
best: his relaxed, comfortable style, clearly enjoying himself but serious; adept way he sent signals to his social conservative base without alienating more secular NH swing voters; also linkage Obama + Huckabee = Change
worst: lamo on both foreign policy AND health care; frankly the later is more significant, because few Americans expect Ark Gov to be a jetsetter; but they might expect a Gov to have a clue on health care, and Huckabee appeared to be cluess, like everyone except Mitt.
ROMNEY
best: “Strong families, strong economy, strong defense” matra which sounds like a message (something he desperately needs right now) attuned to both GOP and Independents and non-lefty Democrats; to same end was the only GOP with a clue on health care; talked about experience looking forward (skills) instead of backwords (old prizes).
worst: Looked like a banker who ate a bad Cobb salad at the country club before coming by to deliver your forclosure papers; real patsy for McC & Huck zingers “you really are the candidate of Change.”
McCAIN
best: relaxed and focused, an even happier warrior than Huckabee, looked like he could have arm wrastled the rest of the field AND the audience; did good job of putting his best foot forward with conservative base GOP votes while still letting “McCain be McCain”
worst: bit too animated and amused to look truly presidential; laughed openly at Ron Paul, along with other, which is a BIG mistake because millions who won’t vote for Paul do respect him and won’t like you for dissing him AND his believers will hate your gutse even more; not smart strategy for November.
GIULIANI
best: without doubt looked the most presidential of the entire field last night; relaxed, confident, rested which is image he REALLY needs right now; spoke beyond NH (to Florida & national media) without being obvious about it
worst: some great lines & argments re: immigration and foreign relations that make a GREAT deal of sense, but which are ANATHAMA to base GOP voters across the USA; McC did a MUCH better job of deflecting this, but G seemed to revel in telling his primary (literally!) audience what is does NOT want to hear.
THOMPSON
best: grump but reasonably articulate AND non-elitist BUT also non-populist conservative platitudes delivered to old grumpy guys in stretch pants, a HUGE share of the GOP base everywhere, by one of their own.
worst: “we won’t be able to have health care coverage for everyone” hardly inspirational even to fellow troglydites; “I note oil company profits; I also note their previous loses” which is a seriously STUPID message in the middle of a New England winter in a week when the price of oil cracked $100 per barrel for first time in history.
PAUL
best: Stood tall for the conscious of the American conservative; projected his stalwart but gentle personality (can see why all those Texas mommas wanted him to deliver their babies!) that is the true kind of civility in public life, just the kind of virtue W blathered on about in 2000 then whiped his hindquarters with 2001-date; linkage with Obama BUT also differentiating himself in ways appealing to conservatives GOPers
worst: stature, voice, lack of stage presence make him a very imperfect messenger; never gave a clear reason (beside getting rid of the war AND the income tax) why he should be president (but not alone there); did nothing to diminish the impression that he’s a flake, albeit an inspired one whose met his moment.
36 - Don’t know exact timing, but NH polls will open early Tuesday morning Eastern time, close early in the evening. No exit polling will be embargoed until polls close (though might be some leakage; check blogs). Depending on how close it is networks will release projections anytime from a minute after poll closing to several hours, while actual results will take longer to come in but not interminable. BUT that will still be the wee hours in jolly old Blighty.
38, 39
Don’t worry, UK Paul, the actual delegates elected and pledged (according to nexus of party rules and various state laws) will NOT be tampered with. BUT that will be a formality UNLESS its a brokered convention which is a likely as Dick Cheney emerging as a Dark Horse.
As for Michigan and other states where a candidate’s name is NOT on the ballot, well, that suggests to me the possibility of a WRITE-IN campaign. Which has several advantages/disadvantages depending on organization, field strength, stratigies of other contenders AND the overall momentum of the race.
For example, could easily see an “unofficial” Obama write in campaign emerging in Michigan IF he is indeed riding a wave. Could even be tied in with “Uncommitted”. Michigan Democratic party is totally selfserving AND (one suspects) in Hilary’s pocket; so if I was part of the Axelrod brain trust wouldn’t think twice about sending more busloads of kids up to the Wolverine State to make some more history. Beautiful thing is, if you lose, you can claim that the system was rigged against you, so of course you lost. BUT if you win AND your name wasn’t even on the ballot . . .
Interesting to note that was the way that STROM THURMOND was first elected to the US Senate from South Carolina.
See that Rasmussen is showing the national Democrat picture moving over the past four days, 3rd January to 6th January as Clinton 43 to 36, Obama 24 to 25 and Edwards 17 to 23%.
The tracking polls final figure is an average of the past four days. Therefore looking at Clinton and Edwards, Hilary must have been well below 36 on day four, the 6th January and Edwards significantly higher than 23, my Maths will not work out the actual figure, perhaps somebody else can.
These figure pre dated last nights debate, but do suggest that New Hampshire, which looks like a sweeping victory for Obama, may not necessarily represent the total national scene.
Question could it be Hilary who drops out and leaves Obama and Edwards to slog it out.
Would Obama and Edwards be a Democrat dream ticket?
If we’re talking VPs for Obama, Brian Schweitzer of Montana isn’t a bad shout.
Does anyone know if any of the prospective presidential candidates are against the death penalty?
Re: potential write-in campaign for OBAMA in MICHIGAN (which is pure speculation on my part) can you imagine a “Write-in Obama, Keep Hope Alive” rally in downtown DETROIT. For all you punters, best vantage point to witness THAT crowd scene might well be just across the river on the roof of a Windor, Ont casino!
BTW, seems to me that one thing Obama has yet to establish (though he’s getting there) is that he is TOUGH.
Perhaps one way for him to begin doing this, is by telling about when he ran against a BLACK PANTHER for Congress in the South Side of Chicago, namely Rep. Bobby Rush (D-IL) who is in Congress today only becaue the Chicago cops couldn’t shoot straight.
Running agains Panther in the projects sure sounds like “Profiles in Courage” to White America! And it’s NOT a negative for Black America, esp. when the Panther is endorsing you for President.
I read somwehere that Republican Ron Paul is opposed - don’t know whether that’s true or not.
45 - Well as long as Florida and Michigan don’t try and have their delegates counted towards the total (any other states?) then there’ll be no problem.
48 Roger
The non partisan Pew Center has the following summary
http://pewforum.org/religion08/compare.php?Issue=Death_Penalty
45. Don’t we get to hear how Dixville Notch votes just after midnight EST?
43: Did you mean a lower league, Mike? Clinton’s comment seems to me better in itself and elegantly-expressed too, while Obama’s reply seems almost pedestrian - “well, words can get some votes and guys elected” - yeah, sure, is that what it’s about?
I fear I might fall out with our genial host over this!
46 - No and No
Not even the worst Clinton0-hater imagines that Hilary is a quitter. PLUS she has too much money, endorsements, committments, consultants and sheer inertia to just drop out. She will stay in until she either wins or is truly forced out of the race because Obama has won it.
As for VP, Edwards would be a re-tred on the ticket, always a negative. Plus South is not the Democratic promised land it was in 1992, except for Florida and possibly (but don’t count on it) Virginia, where Edwards might conceivably help among some constituencies, such as north Fla moderate rednecks (yes, there is such a thing) and similar folks in western Virginia (not to be confused with WV, though same logic would indeed apply there.
Intrade now have it (out of 100) 61.5 Obama and 37.5 Clinton for the nomination.
On the IEM (Iowa electronic Markets where political futures are traded) it is Obama 56 Clinton 39.5
On Betfair it is Obama 0.75-1, Clinton 1.4-1
53 - Think you may be right about Dixville Notch.
54 - Nick, you are truly out-of-touch on this one, showing the probervial British wooden ear re: American politics, most famously demonstrated by Guardian’s “Help Kerry Win Ohio” 2004 campaign!
Your posture is similar to that of William Gladstone re: Abraham Lincoln in 1861-65. The GOM lived to eat his misappreciation of Old Abe. So what’s YOUR favorite condiment.
Labour voters in UK are enamored with the Clintons, just like all Brits were enamored with FDR from 1940 forward. Heck, you’ve got a statue of HIM in Grovernor Square STANDING UP which is an absurdity beyond even the most fervant FDR Democrat.
My point is that your emotional attachment to Hilary Clinton makes you unable to appreciate the amazing impact of Obama upon America. What JFK and RFK had, this guy has got. So factor that into your weltanschauung.
As for the national polls IF New Hampshire confirms that there is indeed a wave of support for Obama, then they are a glacier that is slowly but surely sliding in his direction with increasing velocity.
However, do expect a few roadblocks; wouldn’t be politics without them. AND Hilary’s basic question is indeed more cogent that Obama’s response to millions of Americans, including millions of Democrats.
54 You’re right Nick and anyone who watched the debate last night would readily agree that Hillary considerably out-performed Obama - fact!
47 Gov Schweitzer is an FANTASTIC candidate and governor AND he might help ticket capture Montana (3 EV) and would help drive populist, economic message.
BUT suspect that Obama will get up to speed on THAT himself and really doesn’t need a respectable rabblerouser (like Gov. S or John Edwards) beside him stepping on his best lines.
My guess is that for these insecure times the best bet for Obama would be someone with foreign policy and/or national defense cred. Which is why Richardson is such a hot prospect; fact that he’s a Hispanic who does NOT come off like a Hispanic to Anglo people (his accent is totally non-Hispanic and completely standard US native English-speaker).
45: thanks for that. It could be another late night then. I am tempted to exit the market so I get a bit more sleep!
59 ….. with a curiously 100% Anglo name to boot!
JohnO and Paul M Many thanks. The link suggests just two-Ron Paul and Dennis Kucinich-out of thirteen are aginst. Several of the others want to make it tougher (like introducing it for acts of terror and treason). All this talk of charisma is far less interesting to me than than the values that the candidates hold. Surely it’s these that tell you what sort of a president you are going to get?
Key consideration for VP choices in both parties:
1. Do no harm!
2. Lend to the ticket what the top lacks BUT this has to be in a manner that is seen as relevant; for example, for a US Senator to pick a Gov just because they’re a gov makes no sense, becauase average voter wouldn’t consider that very relevant to the President. BUT the other way around makes more sense, as when Bill Clinton picked Al Gore, for the reason that Gore had significant Beltway experience, which many voters figured might well be helpful to a new president who touted his lack of DC connections.
3. Help win key states; this has always been problematic; for example, in 1968 Agnew failed to win Maryland for Nixon, while in 2004 nobody serious thought Edwards would be the slightest help to Kerry in North (or South) Carolina. BUT it can be a consideration. So look to the key swing states, and see who might fill the bill.
Keep in mind: the bigger the prize, the better, which is why Governor Ted Strickland of Ohio would make my list for Democrats esp. since GOP doesn’t have any comporable Buckeye (though would personally suggest former OH Sec of State Blackwell) as the state GOP is still totally discredited after recent meltdown.
Also, presidential nominees are likely to look for “two-fers” that is, running mates who tick off more than one box on the wish list. Again, this makes Richardson a contender, because not only would he help in New Mexico (also maybe in AZ & CO) but other strong credentials.
IN BOTH PARTIES look for both nominees to use EXTENSIVE polling, focus groups, vetting, turing sheep inside out to look at the entrails and other tested methods of crystal ball gazing. This will NOT be kind of year where THAT decision is going to be an after thought.
Though given GOP luck THEY might well manage to find the Dan Quayle look-alike of 2008. BUT remember just how much impact DQ had on the 1988 result: zippo.
60 Yes John, I think you, PtP and myself were the only UK based PBers to see the two debates through last night. I had certainly had never intended to do so but found them both fascinating.
Best joke of the night was the Director trying in vain to get the new audience in place between the two debates saying over the PA system “We’ve promised the Democrats that we’ll get started expeditiously and as soon as we figure out what that means we’ll do it”
58 - may have a point IF you were judging an Ivy League/Oxbridge debate. But THAT ain’t the deal that went down last night.
61 - precisely. One possible downside MIGHT be any wiff of scandal eminating out of Santa Fe (where it’s a traditional part of the atmosphere). Not that Richardson is rotten with corruption, but he’s not a choir boy either.
63 Was he the guy who reprimanded a youngster for his inability to spell potatos?
Since I’ve been generally Obama friendly, allow me to say again that I was VERY impressed by how GOOD Hilary LOOKED last night - considering the killer schedule PLUS the Iowa result. Don’t think I’ve ever seen her look quite so good AND also presidential (think she and O where pretty even on that one, with maybe a slight edge to her; Edwards is just too slick and Richardson too rumpled).
Reason I mention this, is because physical appearence is EXTREMELY important for women candidates and politicos. (Shift through Barbara Castle’s diaries - the abridged version for your own sakes and count the number of references to her wig). Indeed one of the secrets of Margaret Thatcher’s success was that she understood this and mastered it perfectly.
58 I thought so at the time PtP but how do you measure “out-performed” objectively? Did she change independent/Obama leaning voters towards herself? Which of Obama or Clinton in fact won with the target audience (I’m not one)?
I thought Edwards was bad - over the top, angry, unstructured - but others took that as passion. I thought Obama was too quiet, sat back and let the others argue and could have not been there for all he contributed but some (the majority?) say that was presidential. Richardson impressed, the only one with real experience of responsibility, but IMHO he didn’t have that spark of leadership needed.
Clinton defended and spoke well but she always looked back on what she/Bill had achieved, no vision forwards - at the time I thought she’d performed best but reviewing it I don’t think she did. She presented a case for a third term Clinton presidency, one where the Republicans wouldn’t be a block, she did that well but IMHO she didn’t make a case for “why Hilary”? What does Hilary offer than Richardson couldn’t do better or anyone else from Bill’s administration. Change? Well that’s going to happen anyway as Bush & Cheney are going - it seemed looking back she was offering a continuum of what was rejected in 2000. So no I don’t think she out-performed, she just showed why she’s a lawyer & a Senator, she can answer questions.
64: Haha. I missed that bit - brilliant. The debates were great - as the race has been generally. The US is where it’s at the moment - I’ve completely forgotten about domestic politics which now seems rather staid by comparison. There’s a lot of energy in the primaries and it’s really refreshing to see candidates spending a lot of time actually talking to voters rather than making speeches behind security cordons to party apparatchiks. It’s disappointing how the parties over here don’t seem to really engage with people that much.
66 - Almost. You’ll be amused to learn that his precise mistake was to tell a kid in a school class who’d just spelled the world “P-O-T-A-T-O” that “You left out a letter” and then DQ proceeded to tell the lad that he forgot the “E” at the end!
Now if DQ had been campaigning in YOUR Hampshire he’d have been ok. Or if Noah Webster had never been born. But . . . .
69 - Close of polls in NH next Tuesday night marks the end of retail presidential politics. All tarmacks and TV from there to the first Tuesday after the first Monday in November.
68 Ted, apologies for not including you in the UK late brigade and like you, I just thought Obama was far too quiet.
Hilary went on the offensive, accusing Obama of being a serial policy flip-flopper on a number of issues, which frankly he totally failed to counter.
72 Keep in mind that likely over half of the TV audience when the debate (Dem and Rep) started had switched channels by the end.
So the key thing would be how the candidates peformed in the first 15 minutes. How would you rate Obama in that timeframe?
57: lol! Maybe we’re talking different things, SSI. I wasn’t offering a view on how the comments would go down with voters, just my own opinion of them. Maybe Mike, like you, was looking at voter impact?
If Edwards is showing modest though clearly not winning progress, where is getting the gains from?
71: shame. This is the first race I’ve watched closely, the post-NH camapaign shift will be very interesting then.
73: Obama was very good in the first 15 minutes. The debate started off with questions about his comment that he would take out Al-Quaeda in Pakistan even without permission. He defended that well. The next question was on nuclear terrorism, which he also looked fairly secure on. Thinking back, since one of the key things Obama has to demonstrate is competence on national security, the debate may have worked quite well for him last night.
74. Good point, Nick, albeit only partially.
Cause I think both Mike S & myself (but of course can only speak for moi) both think that what Obama said was not just politique, but also sincere, rational and principled. Very similar to what Bill Clinton told George Bush the Elder in 1992.
BTW, have you actually SEEN the debate or are you going by transcript? Because in this case it was the WAY Obama said what he did, not just the mere words.
70 Is that so, SSI?
To answer your question, I thought before the break things were pretty sedate and even. Edwards struggled but the others were OK. It was after the break that Hillary came very much into her own, and Edwards warmed up.
What kind of viewing figures would the programme have had in the US? Just how influential would it have been?
76 USA is simply too big for any candidate to campaign door to door, soap box to soap box, church basement by church basement from sea to shining sea.
Which is why Iowa & New Hampshire are so special and important to the process. Not every presidential year. But almost always (one way or another) in the truly critical elections. Because they are both small enough that candidate CAN launch their campaigns in a true grassroots fashion.
The trick is to make the switch from retail to wholesale. IF you cannot achieve that, won’t matter how much they love you at the Storm Lake Dairy Queen or the Sunapee Duncan Donuts.
64 - I watched both debates too and gave my thoughts at the end of last night’s thread and on today’s.
Back to work tomorrow though. :=(
79 SSI (and other US Posters)
As you can imagine, I thoroughly enjoy reading the articles in Realclearpolitics and they have aided my understanding of US Politics enormously, not to mention my Bank balance. Some of these articles invite readers comments. I have occasionally glanced at these and I’m afraid they make our own Creatures seem beacons of reason and light by comparison.
Is it more the custom in the US to bombard Sites with drivel in the hope that it somehow enhances your Party’s position?
Btw, what has become of our Creatures? They’ve barely been seen recently. Surely they are interested in the election of the leader of the world’s most powerful nation?
81 Norovirus perhaps?
53 - Speaking of DIXVILLE NOTCH . . .
Note that in the 2004 NH Presidential Primary, the only town (not necessarily or even usually an urban community in New England, but rather the principle civil division) where WES CLARK came in 1st was Dixville; he got 8 votes, Dean got 1, everyone else 0
On GOP side with no contest W got all 11 votes cast in Dixville.
Personal note: back 1964 in a very small town in WVa I amused myself by visiting the storefront campaign headquarters established by the local Republicans (dominant then) and Democrats. NOTE that for many local families, that partisan divide had its roots in the Civil War; folks whose ancestors were for the Union tended to be Republicans, while people who descended from pro-Confederates were most likely Democrats.
In either case, the local campaign HQs were staffed by little old ladies, who believed it their duty to help the cause in this way. What they mainly did was staff their HQ in shifts in the month before EDay, and gave out literature and other campaign impedimentia to anyone who wanted the stuff, including kids who stopped by out of curiosity or boredom. Back then candidates liked to hand out in addition to brochures and flyers all kinds of semi-useful stuff, esp. matches with campaign messages on the covers (that really dates me!), bumperstickers (which people actually put on their bumpers in great numbers back then), buttons, emery boards, combs, etc etc. The most unique handout was a packet of seeds give out by a (successful) candidate for state Agriculture Commissioner.
Anyway, I visited both HQs on EDay, 1964. Cannot remember anything from the Dems. BUT do recall being in the GOP HQ when their was a news report on the radio, that gave the vote cast just after midnight in Dixville Notch. AND how pleased the ladies there were to learn that Barry Goldwater had won Dixville Notch (8 for Barry, 1 for LBJ, I just looked on wiki).
I too was impressed . . . until a few more returns began rolling in!
The VP question is vexing - for the Republican Party if McCain wins it an obvious choice is Governor Pawlenty of MN (my state) - he is backing McCain big time and Minnesota is a key swing state with 10 (EV) and is winnable for the Republicans if they chose Pawlenty - will be tight but winnable - that is why I am hoping McCain does not win on the Republican side - keep MN, Democrat please.
On the Democrat side - it is tough who to chose who complements the ticket - Edwards for both Clinton and Obama does not bring anything to the ticket - he could not win anything for Kerry - he is good but not as VP - this then leaves it wide open - odds are it will be a Southern Governor - or the Governor of Ohio who can capture that state for the Democrats which could be the key to victory in 08.
78 Peter the Punter What kind of viewing figures would the programme have had in the US? Just how influential would it have been?
It was on a network so it was probably seen by more people than the CNN etc debates, on the other hand it was on Saturday night, which is the worst night for audiences , and it was on directly against the Pittsburgh Steelers play off game which probably got most of the audience.
82 Lovely story.
When’s the GOP programme on tonite?
81 - boy, you’ve got THAT one right. Personally think that 99.46% of US blog comments are drivel . . . or worse.
Even the worst Brit blogs are beacons of light by comparison. Which should displease me as a Fenian . . . except that I’m also an Anglophile (the mixture keeps me from going overboard either way!) . . . and I’m pleased to say that the Sasenach’s at least taught the Celtics some manners anyway, cause the Irish blogs also tend to be civilized. THough they do demonstrate the fabled communication skills of the Irish!
83 - Haven’t been following MN politics recently BUT is Pawlenty really still popular in the Gopher State? From what I saw on TV he came off looking distinctly 2nd best after the bridge collapse compared with the Mayor.
IF Pawlenty still retains significant popularity then he might be a reasonable choice; might even help in Wisconsin, also a key swing state.
One factor to consider is the connection between the presidential nominee and potential VPs. Don’t mean formal politics, but rather the PERSONAL connection. My guess is that the nominees of both parties will be presented with a few options that make it though the vetting; then will go with their gut, and that could boil down to chemistry all other things being more-or-less equal . . . or equally unequal to paraphrase Rummy.
I didn’t manage to see the debates last night so I have found the different analyses recorded here interesting. I’ve just seen the BBC news’ brief take on it. No favours there for Clinton.
At the risk of contracting a bad case of Foot in Mouth, I will repeat my impression of a few days ago. There is an historic event building in “The United States of America” which to me has an unstoppable momentum.
Barack Obama personifies a yearning need among today’s electorate for hope, decency, tolerance and aspiration. He articulates this majestically and is resonating across the world. I expect him to. Carry New Hampshire in spectacular fashion and ultimately the Presidency.
84/86 By the power of google
Network Show Viewers(m) 18-49Rating/Share
NBC NFL: Jacksonville vs. Pittsburgh 22.45 8.4/23
CBS Movie: High Crimes 5.40 1.2/3
FOX Cops 5.37 1.9/5
ABC New Hampshire Debates 8.58 2.0/5
As I suspected, did OK but very poor second to the football
85 - Sorry, don’t know schedule and am dashing out the door - check the Union Leader or Concord Monitor websites. BTW they are excluding Ron Paul, which the NH GOP is (formally) protesting by withdrawing its sponsorship.
84 Thanks Paul M.
I can’t really comment on how popular he is as I don’t like the guy so would be biased - but his ratings are high enough I guess - not sure what the latest ones were - it depends on whose view you took whether he came out of the bridge collapse good or bad - a lot of the flack was deflected onto the lieutenant-governor who has survived so far but in February she could be in trouble when the session returns … but he won a 2nd term all be it against Mike Hatch a disaster of a candidate - but if he was VP who knows how it would turn out - would make MN viable at the least for the Republicans … but depends on who the Democrats pick for Presidential nominee .. and a lot of the main Democratic figures here are plumping for Obama .. but I have no idea who will win the MN caucus - polls are scarce this early - Hillary was leading but it is way to early to make a guess yet ..
89 - BUT what were the ratings in NEW HAMPSHIRE? Hard to say, because most of the state is in Boston media market. Would expect debate did better in NH, including people who Tevoed.
90 What possible justification is there for excluding Ron Paul? The other Candidates should refuse to attend.
I also watched the whole show, and agree that it is better to measure candidates against their strategies than ‘performances’ in sn Oxford Union sort of way. All the Dems did well - Obama settling into frontrunner, Hillary proving she can fight back effectively, and Richardson playing to the party for the VP slot.
63 on VP selection is spot on. Strickland (Ohio), Rendell (Penn) and Wes Clarke (General) are all Hillary supporters, but like Richardson would be equally good choices for Obama, and I don’t think he’ll mind their former allegiances. Who in the Dems never supported the Clintons?
Richardson brings a key Demographic (Hispanics), the most complimentary experience, a small swing state (with help for tight Congressional races) and *should* be first choice for either Dem.
The GOP have a harder time, because none of their Presidential candidates want the VP slot behind another (I’m not sure if Huckabee is still angling to be on Giuliani’s ticket). Also, they are so diffuse, that the ticket balance is difficult to predict in advance. But here’s my initial thoughts anyway, based on a Clinton/Richardson or Obama/Richardson ticket.
If Romney: a ’spectrum conservative’, and good for all time zones.
Negatives: Flip-flopper, but no VP helps on that. From Mass.
VP requirements: needs geographical balance, and some support from an Evangelical base that might not turn up otherwise. Pro-lifer.
VP suggestions: Senator John Cornyn of Texas fits the bill
If McCain: Great with Independents, though not a party loyalist
Negatives: Might not get GOP establishment support, or Evangelicals
VP requirements: A good party man, who can ensure GOP turnout
VP suggestions: Lamar Alexander (ex Cab Sec, Governor, now Sen TN) or Tim Pawlenty (Gov Minnesota) who is a supporter
If Giuliani: Moderate, and able to play in Dem safe states (NY, CA)
Negatives: Social liberal, not likely to play well away from coasts
VP requirements: Social arch-conservative, Southern heartlander
VP suggestions: Rick Perry (Gov Texas) who is a supporter, Huckabee
If Huckabee: Socially conservative and likeable
Negatives: Weak on policy (esp foreign), too fond of taxes
VP requirements: Heavyweight fiscal conserv, w/ foreign policy exp
VP suggestions: Condoleeza Rice (spanner amongst the pidgeons)
General GOP VP candidates (untailored): Perry and Pawlenty should be frontrunners, Jeb Bush would be great if he changed his name by Deed Poll, but I think there might be a call for Senator (formerly Gov) George Voinovich of Ohio.
Discuss!
94 Well we know Obama watched the football rather than the GOP panel, so if it wasn’t interesting enough for him…..
O/T But an insult from Tim Hanes in tomorrows Times:
“According to those who trade in the political futures market (a strange and sad bunch) “..sorry, Tim? Sad? Strange? look who’s talking.
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/comment/columnists/tim_hames/article3142140.ece
94: Especially considering he’s polling about 4x what Thompson is in NH. On current trends he’ll likely overtake Giuliani, possibly even Huckabee to finish 3rd.
Then again Paul probably isn’t too bothered - knowing his supporters this sort of thing probably ensures 99% turnout from his fanbase, as well as attracting a few others.
97 Yes, if I had a vote, Andrew, this is exactly the sort of thing that would make me switch to him.
89: Guess the proportion might have been higher in NH, though…
SSI: you’re right, although I saw part of the debate, I’m only going by Mike’s quote for that bit.
95 Sorry, Morus. Too difficult!
100 - Fair enough! I have to be up at 5am, so am off to bed.
I’m likely to miss the overnight blogging on New Hampshire, because I have a major deadline on Wednesday (and meetings in which I really need to be awake), so I am gong to wish all you punters, tubthumpers, and splendid men and women of the pb.com fraternity the very best of luck, and hope that you enjoy your evening as much as I won’t be!
Good night all.
re well Montana’s electoral college votes are certainly well worth having!
Obama in 10 point NH lead in new poll (39-29)
http://politicalticker.blogs.cnn.com/2008/01/06/poll-obama-jumps-ahead-of-clinton-in-new-hampshire/
re 71 unless like 2000 when for several weeks thereafter as well.
101 Goodnite, Morus, and thank for your comments.
Great analysis, Morus. Condi Rice is the best-known of the VP candidates in your list on this side of the pond, of course - if Obama was narrowly defeated in a bitter contest, perhaps Condi would shake a bit of the ethnic vote loose from the Dems, as well as giving foreign policy strength. But I see the force of your other arguments. McCain might need a religious type as much as he needs a loyalist, though, as he’s been rude about the Bible-thumpers, hasn’t he? (And Guiliani too, maybe?) Huckabee would fit either bill - appeals to evangelicals, yet is widely liked and seen as a vaguely plausible President, an important consideration if the top of the ticket is relatively elderly.
The power of VPs to rally voters who dislike the lead candidate always surprises me - if, say, George Galloway were Labour Party leader, I’d be off like a shot, and making someone I really liked deputy leader wouldn’t appease me one little bit.
103: Damned small samples but looks plasiible - note Huckabee moving up despite unpromising terrain too.
103 Rod - Very small sample sizes:
“For the CNN/WMUR survey, 341 New Hampshire residents likely to vote in the Democratic primary and 268 Granite State residents likely to vote in the Republican primary were interviewed. The poll’s sampling error is plus or minus 5 percentage points.”
The Obama-Edwards tag-team goes for the kill..
http://www.foxnews.com/wires/2008Jan06/0,4670,ClintonObamaAbortion,00.html
http://www.cbsnews.com/blogs/2008/01/06/politics/fromtheroad/entry3680063.shtml
RodCrosby@103: Thanks, that pretty much sews up NH then. CNN had it a tie in their Friday/Saturday poll, which spooked the markets just a touch. His intrade price just jumped 6 points in the last 30 mins - I’m off to lump on Obama for NH.
McCain’s +6 seems much more steady, that figure comes up in a lot of polls.
108. True, but if it’s a random sample there’s 98.8% chance Obama leads by at least 1 vote…
111 Thanks Rod. I knew I could rely on you for the math.
One vote will do. Bookies pay out the same on a photo-finish as a drubbing.
The sample sizes are fairly small for most of the pollsters. It’s notable that Rasmussen operate the largest sample size - 1210 on a recent one. And they came up with a 12 point lead for Obama today.
It’s also worth noting that the Real Clear Politics “poll of polls” now puts Obama 3.4 ahead. And that’s with an old Mason-Dixon poll in there putting Hillary two ahead.
Mind you, the more I’ve looked at US pollsters the less I trust them.
85 Fox GOP debate scheduled for 8pm, Sun, Jan 6
For future reference re: DEBATE SCHEDULE
http://www.youdecide2008.com/2007/06/13/full-2008-debate-schedule-from-dnc-and-gop/
92 - Thanks for info! Question: if GOP wants a Minnesotan, why not Sen. Norm Coleman? My guess is that eventual nominee and his brain trust (using that phrase advisedly) will consider that the terrible bridge disaster will make the Gov just too risky a prospect. Remember 1st rule for VP is: do no harm.
One interesting thing re: Pawlenty is fact he used to be a Democrat, might be an interesting message in that; similar dynamic if Dems were to pick Sen. Jim Webb of VA.
With respect to key swing states, here are few possibilities:
REPUBLICANS
FLORIDA = Gov. Charlie Crist, who is not typical partisan attack dog but instead a moderate with strong appeal to Independents and Democrats (latter wouldn’t be worth much but the former would be golden). Note: Sen. Martinez was born in Cuba and is thus ineligible.
ARIZONA = Sen. John Kyle very conservative and partisan would be reasonable match with relative moderates Romney or Giuliani
LOUISIANA = Gov. Bobby Jindal would be a very interesting pick to blunt Obama if he’s Dem nominee; Jindal is first non-White gov (South Indian American) since Reconstruction, and the first ever elected by popular vote; a super technocrat who’s served a term in US House; heck I’ve I was registered to vote in LA would have voted for him myself last Fall. Look for GOP to showcase Gov. Jindal this summer at their national convention.
MISSOURI - probably not a swing state BUT an interesting possiblity is former Sen. John Danforth, who is a patrician moderate conservative with a social consciense with crossover appeal, not sure how he currently rates in Mo but guessing pretty good.
NEW MEXICO - all available talent, which for this purposes consists of US Rep. Heather Wilson, is committed to holding on to US Senate race.
OREGON - US Sen Gordon Smith would be excellent match for conservatives, though his Mormon faith would likely be a bar, either because Romney won the nomination OR because he didn’t; true Catch 22.
PENNSYLVANIA - Don’t think the Keystone State is really going to be winnable for GOP this year BUT if it is the former Gov Dick Thornburg would be an intersting pick; he plays very well at home methinks but is old news elswhere plus he’s been a big time lobbyist for years, with resulting complications.
MICHIGAN, OHIO, WISCONSIN - absolutely critical but no obvious GOP VP possibles; of course Michigan out if Romney is nominee.
IOWA & NEW HAMPSHIRE - by time caucuses are over, candidates and entire political class are sick of the place, and think its gotten what it deserves and more, so Iowan has hard time getting considered. NH similar but a bit different, not so much fatigue but its just so small (3EV). BUT Sen. Jud Gregg is potential VP timber methinks, because he’s a solid but uncontroversial conservative who would definitely help in Granite State IF it’s in play, which it almost certainly is not.
My intended month-long absence from betting after a nightmare weekend in late December has been ruined by all the insightful, interesting and intelligent comments about the American presidency on here. Cuh.
Coleman at the moment is backing Guiliani but no idea if he is interested in becoming V.P. or not - but who knows - he is up for a tight election in the Senate this year in MN
95, 06 Really great stuff!
BUT do disagree with you re: Condi Rice. Do believe that the bloom is well off THAT particular rose.
Ms. Rice has proved herself to be the worst Secretary of State since . . . .? Colin Powell? And Clinton’s first guy was no great shakes can’t recall his name but he looked like Uriah Heep’s undertaker.
Anyway, REALLY don’t think the GOP wants to turn the campaign into the Iraq War and total failure of US diplomacy and foreign policy from 2001 forward.
As for her appeal to Black voters, it is still there. However much they dislike the Cheney Administration in general and it’s disasterous blunderings abroad, they remain very proud of Condi. BUT that is MUCH different from saying that if she’s GOP VP that she’d take away significant number of votes from Obama or even Clinton. No way.
RE VP PIXS
Doubtful if backing the wrong horse for the nomination is going to be the kiss of death in the VP stakes. For example, IF determination is made that Strickland could carry the ticket over the hump in Ohio, then doubt if Obama will hold a grudge!
112. Yes, in a race like this the important thing to discern is “who’s leading?”, not so much the absolute level of support for a candidate, for which MOE is more appropriate.
There’s a useful article and handy spreadsheet to calculate the chance of a lead here…
http://www.washingtonmonthly.com/archives/individual/2004_08/004536.php
VP PIX if OBAMA is DEM NOMINEE
The fact of a Black man at the top of the Democratic ticket could well affect the VP selection, because of differnential and various state-by-state impacts.
For example, would expect a drop in Democratic support in many rural parts of the South, Border States AND Midwest. With compensatory rise in cities AND suburbs.
This would raise the stock of a guy like Strickland, who is from southern Ohio (where it’s pronounced “O-hi-a” as is the river) and has proven appeal to rural voters, and could help sell a Black guy from Chicago. Note that Obama should be able to appreciate this logic, because he had to deal with precisely the same far downstate rural race-angst in his statewide victories (primary & general election) in Illinois.
119 Thanks again, Rod.
Anyone know why everyone seems to be ignoring the Nevada caucus while paying so much attention to the other early ones? South Carolina is getting the stuffing polled out of it while Nevada’s doing well to get two polls a month. Is there some reason why it’s unimportant in the Grand Scheme of Things, or have people just been ignoring it because Hillary’s leads are so big that it doesn’t appear competitive?
95 - Now that I think about, can’t say I really like your other GOP VP picks any better than I do Condi . . . with one exception.
Cornyn and Perry - doubtful if Republicans are going to want to remind voters in the other 49 of the Great State of Texas anytime soon. Will want to tiptoe around Bush legacy, not hang a lantern from it.
Lamar Alexander - real blast from the past in a year when people are fleeing the same old same old; has sucked every butt on the rung above for 40 years with little to show except a brown nose. Would be respectable choice but dull as dirt, plus Tennesee isn’t in play and nothing nearby either (except Bristol Va if the Old Dominion’s in play, which is unlikely unless the wheels falloff).
THE EXCEPTION is former Ohio Gov and US Senator (and mayor of Cleveland) Geoge Voinovich.
The national GOP base distrusts him (for same reasons as McCain) but he’s very popular in Ohio with just about everyone, am positive he’d be welcome in any diner from the ghetto streets of Hough to the rural routes of Rio Grande (home of Bob Evans Farms for the true afficiando of fine pork products).
Also fact that he’s a Serbian-American would be quite interesting in several different ways. He’d also put GOP in the funny name stakes vs Barack Obama; actually do think that Obama’s name is HELPING not hurting him, just becasue it’s so different yet easy to say. Not sure you’d make the same comment re: “Voinovitch” but it’s not that bad once you get used to it.
Just two problems with George V:
1) he’s nearly as old as Methusulah’s goat, and unlike McCain he looks it.
2) doubtful that GV truly believes he is presidential timber; which means I’d bet against him wanting, seeking or perhaps even accepting the VP nomination; because George is the kind of guy who wouldn’t think twice about sayin No if he thought it was the right thing to do.
22 Interesting question but don’t have an answer. Would check the Las Vegas press.
NOTE that right at the moment Nevadans are dealing with terrible winter storm that among other things has caused dam failure that’s flooded entire town near Reno.
Wouldn’t bet a dime based on ANY pre-Iowa poll anywhere in the US. Obama’s stock is currently rising EVERYWHERE from Bangor to Honolulu. IF he wins NH that trend will continue. IF not, then it will slow but is unlike to stagnate or reverse in nearterm short of a serious loss or similar roadblock.
New USA/Gallup has Obama +13, sample size 750ish.
125. ding dong! the Witch is dead!
RE: Nevada Democratic Caucuses, might want to check this progressive Democratic website: