And the Nominees Are ...
While it's hardly formal yet, we seem to be looking at a McCain-Clinton election. Barring something major, McCain has the Republican nomination wrapped up; there's simply no way Romney (or Huckabee, or Ron Paul) manage to recover and secure the nomination, barring events that would be bizarre even by the standards of this election cycle.
It's less clear that Clinton will be the nominee, but signs are certainly pointing in that direction. Edwards dropping out before Super Tuesday (which surprised me) does not help her, but seems unlikely to stop her. Florida seems like the most instructive state when looking ahead to Feb 5, and it saw Clinton pulling about 50% of the vote with Edwards still on the ticket. Yes, there was very little "campaigning" done by Democrats there, but I'm inclined to believe that campaigning tends to be overrated in such races (except when it comes to a (perceived) lack of campaigning when other candidates are campaigning), plus, with all the states voting next Tuesday, there's very little time for campaigning in any of them, let alone all of them. Hillary's other problem comes in the form of the party rule that assigns delegates from each state on a proportional basis. While McCain, on the back of several winner-take-all primaries on Tuesday, will deliver a knockout blow to Romney, Hillary is poised to win more delegates, but hardly in knockout fashion. It will turn into more a matter of how long Obama wants to drag things out. Assuming he doesn't drop out after Tuesday (which I don't currently think he will, but, well, I didn't think Edwards or Giuliani were going to be dropping out one day after Florida), the February 12 states look very favorable to him (Virginia, Maryland, and, it's not a state, but the District of Columbia votes as well), which likely translates into dragging this whole thing into March (at least March 4, when the big prizes of Ohio and Texas vote, along with the smaller prizes of Vermont and Rhode Island).
Obama could try to drag the whole thing to the convention. While I think Hillary will achieve a majority of all delegates by that point, I'll downplay that assumption and go along with this scenario. I do not see it going well for the Democrats. Michigan and Florida will try to seat their delegates, and, if they don't, it will be bad press for the party. The Republicans are on firmer ground here, as they penalized every state that selected delegates before February 5 (although this still allowed for the sham of Iowa, and, to a lesser extent, Nevada, holding caucuses but not being penalized because they didn't officially select any delegates). The Democrats, on the other hand, picked and choosed which states they would sanction and which they would not (they allowed the states that claim a traditional spot in the process to vote early, no matter how tenuous the tradition). Moreover, Republicans penalized states by halving their delegations, while Democrats did so by barring the entire delegation. Once again, bad news for the democrats. If they let the delegates in, it benefits Hillary enormously as she gains 192 delegates and Obama only gains 80 (there are also 55 "uncommitted" delegates, which I think will break in Obama's favor but are likely to be split). If they let in the delgates, Obama's people will complain, and if they don't, the Clintons will complain some, but mostly leave it to the press to make their case for them. As much as I like rules and order, the Clintons have the better case here, due to the boneheaded way the DNC handled the situation. Playing favorites with the states and an outright ban on seating the delegates for those states that were punished were both bad ideas. Howard Dean, if he has any sense (I said if), must be hoping for Clinton to put this thing away and he doesn't have to worry about this nightmare situation where he's stuck with two bad choices.
As for me, I'll be sitting out the 2008 Presidential election. Oh, sure, I might decide to write-in Fred Thompson or something, but I'm not voting for McCain and I'm certainly not voting for Hillary (or, should he actually get the nomination, Obama). I'll still be voting down-ballot; with any luck, we'll get Mitchell out, and there are always a slew of propositions, judicial retentions, state Congress, and other such races. One note on the judicial retentions -- please do not vote straight yes like some people do. Some of these guys actually deserve to be thrown out, but nobody ever is because of all the people who vote straight yes.
On Tuesday, I'll probably vote for Fred Thompson in the Republican primary. His name is almost certainly still on the ballot, and McCain's going to win in a landslide, so it doesn't matter much. Do look for Romney to have a "surprisingly strong" finish in Arizona; there's a large Mormon population here, and McCain has ticked off his share of Arizona Republicans.
It's less clear that Clinton will be the nominee, but signs are certainly pointing in that direction. Edwards dropping out before Super Tuesday (which surprised me) does not help her, but seems unlikely to stop her. Florida seems like the most instructive state when looking ahead to Feb 5, and it saw Clinton pulling about 50% of the vote with Edwards still on the ticket. Yes, there was very little "campaigning" done by Democrats there, but I'm inclined to believe that campaigning tends to be overrated in such races (except when it comes to a (perceived) lack of campaigning when other candidates are campaigning), plus, with all the states voting next Tuesday, there's very little time for campaigning in any of them, let alone all of them. Hillary's other problem comes in the form of the party rule that assigns delegates from each state on a proportional basis. While McCain, on the back of several winner-take-all primaries on Tuesday, will deliver a knockout blow to Romney, Hillary is poised to win more delegates, but hardly in knockout fashion. It will turn into more a matter of how long Obama wants to drag things out. Assuming he doesn't drop out after Tuesday (which I don't currently think he will, but, well, I didn't think Edwards or Giuliani were going to be dropping out one day after Florida), the February 12 states look very favorable to him (Virginia, Maryland, and, it's not a state, but the District of Columbia votes as well), which likely translates into dragging this whole thing into March (at least March 4, when the big prizes of Ohio and Texas vote, along with the smaller prizes of Vermont and Rhode Island).
Obama could try to drag the whole thing to the convention. While I think Hillary will achieve a majority of all delegates by that point, I'll downplay that assumption and go along with this scenario. I do not see it going well for the Democrats. Michigan and Florida will try to seat their delegates, and, if they don't, it will be bad press for the party. The Republicans are on firmer ground here, as they penalized every state that selected delegates before February 5 (although this still allowed for the sham of Iowa, and, to a lesser extent, Nevada, holding caucuses but not being penalized because they didn't officially select any delegates). The Democrats, on the other hand, picked and choosed which states they would sanction and which they would not (they allowed the states that claim a traditional spot in the process to vote early, no matter how tenuous the tradition). Moreover, Republicans penalized states by halving their delegations, while Democrats did so by barring the entire delegation. Once again, bad news for the democrats. If they let the delegates in, it benefits Hillary enormously as she gains 192 delegates and Obama only gains 80 (there are also 55 "uncommitted" delegates, which I think will break in Obama's favor but are likely to be split). If they let in the delgates, Obama's people will complain, and if they don't, the Clintons will complain some, but mostly leave it to the press to make their case for them. As much as I like rules and order, the Clintons have the better case here, due to the boneheaded way the DNC handled the situation. Playing favorites with the states and an outright ban on seating the delegates for those states that were punished were both bad ideas. Howard Dean, if he has any sense (I said if), must be hoping for Clinton to put this thing away and he doesn't have to worry about this nightmare situation where he's stuck with two bad choices.
As for me, I'll be sitting out the 2008 Presidential election. Oh, sure, I might decide to write-in Fred Thompson or something, but I'm not voting for McCain and I'm certainly not voting for Hillary (or, should he actually get the nomination, Obama). I'll still be voting down-ballot; with any luck, we'll get Mitchell out, and there are always a slew of propositions, judicial retentions, state Congress, and other such races. One note on the judicial retentions -- please do not vote straight yes like some people do. Some of these guys actually deserve to be thrown out, but nobody ever is because of all the people who vote straight yes.
On Tuesday, I'll probably vote for Fred Thompson in the Republican primary. His name is almost certainly still on the ballot, and McCain's going to win in a landslide, so it doesn't matter much. Do look for Romney to have a "surprisingly strong" finish in Arizona; there's a large Mormon population here, and McCain has ticked off his share of Arizona Republicans.
Labels: Election 2008
posted by DC | 8:39 AM
2 Comments:
I agree. I already voted for Fred on my early ballot
You may find some third-party candidate for President that you feel comfortable voting for. Maybe a Libertarian?
Good analysis, though.
Post a Comment
<< Home