Well… Here it is…In spite the polls, I think McCain will win, and a few surprises await us.
I should make a few points to explain certain selections:
- Nevada: I originally did not have Nevada to go for McCain, but my Mark, is confident it will. I will trust his opinion on that
- Colorado: I think there is a chance McCain could take it, but I expect it to go for Obama.
- New Mexico: Same as Colorado. McCain could win it, but soures tell me that Bush won New Mexico mostly because he had a superior ground game, an advantage I am not convinced McCain has this year.
- Iowa: I was curious about Obama’s recent stop there, but still think he takes it.
- Minnesota: I hear it is close again in Minnesota.. But McCain pulled out of there and and I wrote it off then too.
- New Hampshire: Another state I believe McCain has a good shot at taking, but still giving no Obama.
- Pennsylvania: This state, I believe, is going to be the prize of 2008. And based on various sources I have (and recent events) I think McCain is going to pull off an upset there.
I am sure the lefty trolls will write this off as over confidence, But I believe one way or another, McCain will be elected President. I sit here tonight, confident of victory. I was more nervous four years ago than I am now. McCain will be our next president.
Tags: 2008 Campaign, Colorado, Iowa, Nevada, New Mexico
November 3rd, 2008
I’ve long thought that it might come out that way, and now Michael Barone raises the possibility, at least as far as the GOP contest goes:
As for Republicans, the number of combinations of plausible results in the early contests rises into the dozens. Mike Huckabee is coming on strong in Iowa, threatening Mitt Romney’s lead; John McCain is roughly tied with Rudy Giuliani for second place in New Hampshire; Giuliani and Romney are leading in Michigan; Fred Thompson seems to be narrowly behind Romney and Giuliani in South Carolina. These five candidates all have scenarios of varying plausibility showing them winning the nomination. The key question is whether the winners of Iowa and New Hampshire will get a bounce in the next contests. Bounces have been common, but not universal (Edwards 2004 and George W. Bush 2000 in New Hampshire). Will voters in Michigan and Florida be willing to subcontract their judgment to the voters in Iowa and New Hampshire who have seen more of the candidates? No one knows for sure.
Some Republican insiders are talking about the possibility that none of the candidates gets a majority of delegates. Presumably the nomination will be brokered, probably long before the convention, but not before the party goes through considerable turmoil. I think that’s possible; unlikely things can happen (Florida 2000).
Remember, when delegates are selected through the primary process, they are only committed to vote for their candidate on the first ballot. Certainly, someone who goes to the convention for, say, Romney will likely keep voting for Romney…unless and until it becomes clear that their guy won’t make it…then it becomes time to say, “ok, I’ll back your guy, instead, provided that…”; he gets to be VP, or SecState, or what have you. A lot of political dealmaking will go on behind closed doors if no candidate gets a first ballot majority. This sort of thing hasn’t happened at all for more than 50 years - and we have to go back nearly a century to find genuinely contested major party conventions. The modern primary system was designed to take decision making on nominees out of the hands of party bosses and place it in the hands of the people - and it worked, except that it has now turned our nominating process into a political circus where money becomes ever more powerful…and it just might be breaking down as a large number of candidates are able to raise sufficient funds to be competitive for an extended period of time in the nominating process.
Barone doesn’t get into the prospect of the Democrats having a brokered convention - the conventional wisdom being that if Hillary wins IA and NH, she’ll then roll irresistibly on to the nomination. Of couse, I’m not so sure Hillary will win IA - in fact, I’m becoming just a little bit convinced that she’s going to lose there, and perhaps lose rather badly (coming in third, or worse). After such an event, even a win in NH (unless by a clear majority over the other candidates, combined) might not be convincing enough to the party bosses to rally ’round her…and certainly wouldn’t be convincing enough for the leftwing ‘netroots (who don’t really like her all that much) to surrender their fight for a purely leftwing candidacy in 2008. And even if Hillary does win in both places, I’m still not 100% convinced that this will sew it up for her - might sew it up as far as the party bosses are concerned, but won’t sew it up as far as the kook left base of the party is concerned.
In short, there are strong prospects of both parties failing to secure a first-ballot nominee in the primary/caucus process. This can get really rather messy - several times in the past, when a convention was contested, part of the party bolted and formed a third party (Democrats in 1860, Republicans in 1912, eg). Given the poisoned political atmosphere, the stong passions on both sides, it may become impossible for the United States to get a President in 2008 elected by a majority of the people…depending on which way the political cookie crumbles, 40% might be sufficient to elect the next President. All I can say is: keep yourself braced for a wild political ride next year.
Tags: 2008 Campaign, Iowa, Party Conventions, Primaries
November 26th, 2007
