Analysis and discussion of elections and opinion polls in Australia
New Hampshire thread
In a probably vain effort to maintain order around here, I will henceforth be running separate threads for discussion of the US presidential campaign. Here’s the first.
Author: William Bowe
William Bowe is a Perth-based election analyst and occasional teacher of political science. His blog, The Poll Bludger, has existed in one form or another since 2004, and is one of the most heavily trafficked websites on Australian politics.
View all posts by William Bowe
Hillary is in meltdown and will be lucky to win another primary or caucus this month. Obama by at least 10% tomorrow
As for the GOP, McCain by 3-5% over Romney, the only other candidate seriously contesting the NH primary
The odds on Centrebet for Obama winning the presidency have shortened over the last 24 hours from 2.25 to 1.95, shame I didn’t get in earlier!
The rise and rise of Obama the Iowa cacus is remarkable. I think Clinton’s last chance will be super Tuesday where the strength of her party machine will assist her. On a state by state basis Obama is proving too good a campainer.
Mind you, if she keeps bleeding support at her current rate the sponsor’s might pull the plug before then.
Don’t know that getting all red-eyed and teary will do anything to arrest the Clinton slide …
It also plays into the hands of those sexist b@stards who held up the “iron my shirt” signs …
Who wants the leader of the free world to “tear up” when faced with almighty challenge? they will say …
Obama by a mile …
Personally I’d like to see Edwards get up for the Democrats as he appears to have the best policies across the board. Whoever thought being a white male would be a disadvantage in American politics?
For the GOP I’d like to see Ron Paul get the nomination as the front-runners all seem rather toxic to me.
Having been an Obama fan from way back, I am just a little hesitant at a hint of
hawkishness coming through now.
Just hope he is just trying to show a bit of muscle to sway the power-hungry,but is in fact a dove underneath!
From the previous thread, Glen’s observation:
“Still he’s (Giuliani) not getting favourable press with his strategy and it should hurt him but really can the Republicans win the Election with a baptist minister, a morman or a senior citizen???? The only logical choice for them is Giuliani and if he’s not nominated the Republicans will have no shot whatsoever.”
Much as I am wary of saying never say never and all that…
…I happen to think the Repugs have no chance in ’08 no matter who they put up. Take the anger from ’04, treble it, then multiply by 50,000. That’s how badly the Dems want to win this time. Normally the Republicans are well on their way to endorsing a candidate by this stage – this time, they’re a mess. Their field is so thin that McCain, of all people, is being thrown around as the ‘establishment’ candidate! He’s already died and been resurrected politically once in this campaign. Face it, the Repugs have no-one that’s going to galvanise them into voting. The Dems have at least two (Obama and Edwards – together on a ticket they will be immensely tough to beat) and even Dems who don’t like Hillary will probably get out and vote if push came to shove.
Anyway, Giuliani is a nutcase, although I suppose that doesn’t exactly make him unique amongst the Repug field.
“Personally I’d like to see Edwards get up for the Democrats as he appears to have the best policies across the board.”
I agree. But I wouldn’t mind an Obama-Edwards ticket, even if it’s the ‘wrong’ way around…
Megan Hillary is struggling and she will be beaten significantly in NH, the Democratic primaries the way they work assist Obama and Clinton but i think in the end it will help Obama.
For the record McCain will win NH for the Republicans with Romney a distant second followed by Giuliani and then Huckleberry that’s my prediction.
Firstly Democratic Members of Congress have votes thus Hillary wins big in NY 39 votes to 1 but more even elsewhere. Nevertheless Obama will be greatly assisted by the fact that most Democrat primaries attribute delegates proportionally thus even if Clinton wins some big States Obama will pick up a significant portion aswell.
Dave, RP whose name should not be mentioned for fear of his crazy internet supporters coming on here is to put it plainly nuts. RP is in the wrong Party IMHO, and he’ll bow out after Feb 5. I hope Rudy Giuliani picks up the Republican nomination being a moderate Republican i think should help out in the big States he just has to sit tight and weather the early primaries and bad press for his strategy.
My biggest concern about Obama is that he’s never faced a genuinely contested race with the Republicans. The GOP candidates are so lacklustre that they will simply go negative from the start, Edwards and Clinton have dealt with that pressure before but Obama is untested.
Glen, I agree that RP is nuts, nominating him would be like the Liberals deciding to accept Prodos as a candidate. I’d still enjoy the sideshow though.
So long as the republicans pick either McCain or guiliani they will win, the republicans are the daddy party, so the presidency fits neatky with their strengths, plus noone is going to link any republican with the Bush whitehouse, and Bush’s approval rating will not affect the result
however the congressional approval rating will affect the democratis contenders, because they are members of the majority party, and are therefore part of the pelosi/murtha/reid group of what has become unpopular incompetants.
the presidential elction is the republicans to lose, and obama is all puff and no sunstance
Has anyone found a good US pollbludger equivalent?
11 Brisbaner:
The polls and betting markets contradict you.
What say you?
Being the Clintons one would not be surprised if they put someone up to the “iron my shirt” thing as a get out the sympathy measure.
Citizens went to the polls in Dixville Notch a moment after midnight Tuesday to cast the first ballots in a 2008 presidential primary.
[‘Rick Erwin tallies the nation’s first primary votes in Dixville Notch, New Hampshire.
They gave Sen. John McCain an early lead in the GOP race and denied Sen. Hillary Clinton any votes in the Democratic contest.
McCain garnered four votes, followed by former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney with two and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani with one.
Sen. Barack Obama, fresh off a victory in the Iowa caucuses, was a favorite among Dixville Notch Democrats, with seven votes. Former Sen. John Edwards won two votes, and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson got one.
Clinton drew no votes among the 10 Democrats casting ballots in Dixville Notch, a hamlet of about 75 people near the Canadian border.
For the rest of the state, most polls open at 6 a.m.; the last close at 8 p.m.’]
A good liberal Democrat site is Daily Kos.
Francis- I like these two, the first being about Repub and the second Demo. But they have up to twenty threads running simultaneously staring on the same day!!
I think Obama, then Edwards and Clinton in a close tie for second. Hopefully Richardson will drop out afterwards, he’s just waisting his time.
The Republican primary, like all things the republicans have done so far, should be hilarious. The longer it’s a 5 or 6 way fight, the more stuffed they will be by november. The repub candidates seem to really hate each other.
Predictions for NH Primary
Democrats
Obama
Clinton
Edwards
Richardson
Republicans
McCain
Romney
Giuliani
Huckabee
Paul
Hunter
Obama will win New Hampshire. The only interest is in the exacta for second. I’m hoping Edwards. If Obama becomes the eventual democratic elect, I hope he can overcome the redneck vote.
Let’s get fair dinkum, Obama would be good for the state the world is in right now, but if I had to have a bet, I’d be backing a republican at the odds for the presidency, unless Edwards is the Democratic candidate.
On the republican side, McCain is expected to win over Romney tomorrow but not as easily as Obama.
Everything the Republicans can throw at Clinton they already have. If Obama gets in we will just see swift-boating all over again. The key lesson of the 1999 primary, and the 2000 and 2004 elections was if you can define your opponent before they define themselves you do a lot of damage to them.
Clinton is a centre-left candidate, woman, married to Bill, likes healthcare. She is defined. The republicans have already tried to slander her and have failed. She will defeat the republican in an election. But with Obama as the candidate it becomes an open contest again! Sigh.
I understand the Democrat members want a left-wing candidate, but I don’t understand why they are shooting themselves in the collective foot.
I read once that progressives hate success of their own side. I used to disagree but times like this make me wonder … 🙂
12 – Frances
Try http://www.politics1.com
Not as good as our own Poll Bludger of course, but not too shabby at all…
Romney will probaby win republican in my view. He is tipped to come second in all the republican primaries/caucuses. And as no other candidate is comming consistantly first, comming second in South Carolina, New Hampshire, Nevada and florida will start to add upp. Giuiliani’s lead in Florida is not enough to counter that. Romney has also won Wyoming convinsingly.While Giuliani would probably do well in California on super Tuesday. A significant amount of medium sized states will show him some love. like his home Massachussetts, mid west states. Especially the home of Mormons Utah. (Prediction Romney 99% 😛 ). Mcain will take votes away from the others in plaes like Arizona and Maine. However it will remain close mayybe even after super tuesday and will be a war of attrition. I predict the real winner will be the democrats 🙂
dembo, I was of the view that Clinton is absolutely above everything else, in it for herself. She supported Dubya all the way over Iraq simply to make it difficult for Kerry in 04, obviously with her own super selfish interests in mind.
Now it’s fine for any politician to have ambitions, but she acted in the detriment of her party. Also Hillary is more centre right from what I could gather.
Actually Dembo, the polls show that Obama has a better chance against any Republican then Clinton.
Dave says: “My biggest concern about Obama is that he?s never faced a genuinely contested race with the Republicans.”
Indeed, and in fact Obama has never actually done anything. After a privileged upbringing he went from being editor of the Harvard Law Review in 1990 to the Illinois state legislature for a safe all-black district in 1996 to being elected virtually unopposed to the Senate all of three years ago. He has absolutely no record for anything except windy rhetoric of the “let’s all unite and feel good” type which Americans seem to love so much. If he didn’t have the novelty value of being black he would never even have thought of running for president.
It now appears that he may well be able to beat Clinton and bluff his way to the nomination, but if he is nominated the Repubs will absolutely eat him alive, particularly if they have enough brains left to nominate McCain, a man of real substance and integrity and with a distinguished personal and political record. Not only will they quite legitimately be able to attack Obama for his non-existent record and experience, and for the shallowness of his policies, which are mostly just slogans, they will also run a covert racist campaign that will undermine his support everywhere except on the liberal coasts. Given Bush’s record, the Repubs ought to be heading for a massive defeat in November, but the Dems might just have found a way to lose again – by nominating a candidate with zero credentials to be president and massive vulnerability to the kind of dirt campaign the Repubs do so well. It’s hard to credit, really.
adam
“If he didn’t have the novelty value of being black he would never even have thought of running for president.”
Can you substantiate that remark
Adam 25, are you from Queensland?
I would like to have a better understanding of how this nomination process works for both camps. What reading I have done so far has just served to further confuse me (admittedly not that difficult).
So far it seems that the votes in some state’s primary / caucus / hybrid / whatever, are binding on the eventual respective convention delegates and some are not, while the process in some states is conducted on a winner take all approach and in other states on a proportional approach, with yet other delegates being selected by the party organization in certain states. Some votes appear to be cast secretly while others seem to involve a show of hands, or standing in a corner of a room.
Meanwhile some states appear to have lost either all or half their entitlement to their party’s convention delegates for ‘going early’.
Also, it seems that people can roll up with a choice of participating in either the Democrat or Republican process. Is it a free for all available to any mug citizen, or do people actually have to have some sort of party affiliation to participate?
Can anyone please suggest a website(s) regarding each party that makes a reasonably clear and preferably succinct explanation of the process involved?
Finally, I read somewhere that come the actual presidential election itself, an independent candidate could stand but might only be able to get onto the ballot in some states (but not others). Can someone please explain how that works?
Brenton, everything you would ever likely need/want to know about Adam can be found by clicking on his name.
Oh, on re-reading my last post (29) sounded like I was being narky,
srry Adam, I didn’t mean it to sound like that
There is less of a policy gap between the leading Democrats than their partisans admit. The Republican’s only prospects are McCain and Guliani who have a cross-over appeal, however they are unpopular with the conservative base and their hawkish foreign policy views would be a liability in an election. Romney is the Brendan Nelson of American politics. Huckabee would terrify country-club Republicans into abstaining or voting for an independent
Barack Hussein Obama – as described by Gerard Henderson – will be the next President of the United States. His appeal is to the non-partisans. he will galvanize the unaligned voter. Expect the largest ever turnout in November – people who have never voted in their lives. And they will vote for Howard and Hendersons mate Obama. BTW I assume the Australian media, including Laurie Oakes, will follow up with Howard when Obama claims the nomination, and ask if he stands by his comments as Prime Minister that terrorists will be praying for an Obama victoy.
Well, call me narrowly focussed, but Howard’s idiotic and demented attack on Obama is what sways me to cheer Barack on.
It would be just another sweet nail in Rodent’s coffin of global irrelevance if Obama won Pres.
Geoffrey @ 30 –
The US Presidential Primary process is as heterogeneous as you describe. I’ve lived in 3 US states over my years (still a US citizen, for that matter), and each of these have been “primary” states. A primary is where the entire public can cast a ballot for the candidate of their choice. In some states you need to be pre-registered as a member of the party; in other states, with “open” primaries (such as NH) you can declare party affiliation when you walk into the polls, and then un-declare that affiliation on the way out.
Caucuses seem (to my untrained eyes) rather closer to the Australian process of party pre-selection for candidates – tiny, raucous, and highly liable to all the vicissitudes of branch-stacking.
The end result is to select most of the 4100-ish delegates to the Democratic convention, and the 3000-ish delegates to the Republican convention. Only the majority of those delegates are selected directly by voters. Others, known as “superdelegates” are party officials and elected officials of their respective parties; they are free to cast their votes as they please.
The entire national primary/caucus system emerged in the post-WW I period, and didn’t really take its final form until the 1940s; before that, candidates were selected in “smoke-filled rooms”, where cigar-puffing pollies picked a candidate without any input from the electorate. While this process had the advantage of consensus-building, the trend toward direct election of convention delegates has given more breadth to the candidates available to either party.
As for getting onto the Presidential ballot, each state holds its own election on the first Tuesday in November; thus, each candidate must file with the respective Secretary of State the paperwork to get them on the ballot. This often means they have to file a requisite number of signatures (somewhere between 100 and 10,000, depending on the size of the state) of registered voters who indicate their desire to have that candidate on the ballot. This is not a substantial barrier to any candidate running a national campaign: the presidential ballot in California (where I voted in 1992, 1996, and 2000) had at least eight different candidates running for president. Still, there are fifty states, and you’ve got to get paperwork filed with each state at some time long before the election (generally 90 days). Some candidates can’t manage that.
Ah, just six weeks from our poll to their poll. Glory!
Ah, nice to see one’s money at work, and even more so when one’s heart is in it too. As noted, my money has been on Obama for quite a while, (plus a side bet on Huckabee/McCain), so yes, I’m relaxed and comfortable for now.
I disagree with Adam about Obama, he can easily beat any of the Repulicans for President, and it’s more than being about a ‘shoping list’ of so called ‘achievements’ of so called ‘experienced’ politicians from Washington.
Achievements? Just take a look at America, take a look at the mess, from not even noticing 19 young men training to fly planes into your iconic buildings, to bungled wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and a city flooded with thousands stranded in their own bodily wastes while the President rode around his holiday farm.
Achievements? Point to some, by any of them, left or right, it’s all the same. The country is wallowing in debt, financial scams of horrendous proportions, a tsunami of social security obligations they cannot possibly meet, and a Whitehouse run by a cabal of neocon nutters who think the Likud party and Mossad should be running the countries foreign policy, (and it does!!)
Achievements? Show me some! Anything!
Obama has the mojo working, has gotten the pulse of this p!ssed off country, and is riding the wave of its discontent with all things Washington…all the way to Washington.
Spare me the ‘achievements’ or the ‘experience’ or whatever it is that got them where they are.
They DO NOT WISH TO BE THERE!
Enter, Obama.
Make that “country’s” in my last past, and I’ll stand by every word of it.
The thing I’ve come to realize – talking to my American mates – is that there really does seem to be some sort of massive sea-change going on in the US right now. Obama is electrifying. My mates have seen him speak, and they’ve come away believers.
All this talk about “electability” is nothing but pure spin. Obama is entirely electable, and – given that the US isn’t likely to put another Republican in the White House for at least a generation – this is his moment. It’s just really bad timing that Hillary waited until 2008. She could have gone after W. in 2004 – she had the opportunity, the means, and the motive – but she didn’t want the fight. Instead, she and her wing of the party supported Kerry desultorily. The result: Kerry lost, leaving the path clear for 2008. (Oh, and we all got another 4 years of W.) But Hillary miscalculated. She didn’t understand just how badly Americans would want to turn the page – not just on the last 7 years, but on the last 15 years.
Good to hear from Adam again, he is supporting Hilary.
Adam what makes you think that the Repubilicans will not do the same with boring Hilary.
And another thing is America a democracy Adam? A country where less than 50 percent of people vote and you need large amounts of money to run. That is not a democracy.
Adam
what do you think of Hilary’s chances?
Just read some interesting figures. The war in Iraq has cost the USA $483,836,000,000. The USA National Debt since the Bush Presidency has soared from $6,400,000,000,000 to $9,203,000,000,000. No wonder Americans are looking for fresh hope and hopefully for someone who is better at maths!
Yes, but does that take in to account efforts to make the pie higher, Brenton?
People, ranting about the evils of Bush (about which I mostly agree with you) is not an adequate reply to my post above about Obama. Bush will not be a candidate. In that sense it will not be a re-run of Howard v Rudd. It will be as if Howard retired before the election and Petro Georgiou had replaced him. If the Repubs are smart enough to nominate McCain (a big if, I agree), they will have a candidate with no links to the Bush administration, who was in fact Bush’s opponent for the nomination in 2000, and who has a vastly superior CV to Obama’s.
Yes Marky, the Repubs will do a smear job on whoever the Dems nominate, and yes Clinton has plenty of negatives of her own (although I don’t agree she is boring), but she has much more credibility than Obama. The Dems don’t have a perfect candidate (since Al Gore decided not to run), but Clinton is the best they have. The allegation that Obama has no qualifications to be president will not be a smear, it will be a fact, and McCain will flog it for all it’s worth. That, on top of the Bradley effect and the covert racist campaign the Repub grassroots will run, would make Obama’s job very difficult, whatever the polls say now.
You are all also making a big mistake in assuming that just because Americans have gone sour on Bush and the Iraq war, they have suddenly turned into hairy peaceniks. They haven’t, and regardless of the crimes of Bush they won’t vote for a candidate who is seen as soft on national security or terrorism. In a McCain v Obama race, McCain would have this issue all to himself, since Obama has no record at all, personally or politically. Also his middle name is Hussein, which no doubt the Repubs will draw everyone’s attention to at every opportunity.
Adam can’t see past his *centre/right neocon nose* to see whats going on.
* socially liberal,right-wing everything else.
The people have never liked politicians, but the lot that have been in Washington the last decade are absolute poison to the people.
They don’t want any of them. Obama is the closest thing they’ve got to a big broom to sweep all the shit away. How he turns out is problematic and really not important.
Right now he offers Hope and he will win the Presidency easily.
Actually Adam, if you meant me , I wasnt replying to your post at all!
I think Obama should be pleased to be attacked by a completely nutcase website as linked in Adam’s post. Some of the other T-shirts were
Guns don’t kill People. Abortion Clinics Kill People.
My Jesus can Beat Your Allah
Kill Il Jong
9 of 10 terrorists agree…A democrat congress is good for Jihad.
Peace Through Superior Firepower
You can tell as much about someone by their enemies as by their friends.
Adam, don’t you think that Hillary’s high negatives are a very important negative?
Clinton will survive until at least Super Duper Tuesday simply on the basis that she has the money to keep going until then. Even then there might still be some cash in the piggie bank and she could keep going even if she by then she has no chance of winning the actual nomination simply out of spite.
I expect her to lose tomorrow and South Carolina. Then media’s love affair (and my own for that matter) with Obama will end at some stage. But if it is not before Feb. 5th then he will have it in the bag.
Bill Richardson will make a fine Secretary of State. Edwards is not sticking around to be VP again. If there is little chance of winning after tomorrow, he will stay just to hurt Clinton and keep a profile to have a crack at the election for Governor in South Carolina in 2010 or North Carolina this year.
Adam whilst your points are valid ones’ in a country full of innuendo and ugliness, and i agree with some, i for one think Obama can overcome them or Edwards if he is the candidate.
People i think are seeing through smear and trickery as was seen in Australia last year. People also do not like the Republicans due to the Iraq war and America is moving towards a nasty slowdown. Obama can win because he has the ability to overcome smear through his charisma and intelligence. Only two things worry me about Obama the white vote and the possibility that some wacko will kill him.
Hillary is in meltdown and will be lucky to win another primary or caucus this month. Obama by at least 10% tomorrow
As for the GOP, McCain by 3-5% over Romney, the only other candidate seriously contesting the NH primary
The odds on Centrebet for Obama winning the presidency have shortened over the last 24 hours from 2.25 to 1.95, shame I didn’t get in earlier!
The rise and rise of Obama the Iowa cacus is remarkable. I think Clinton’s last chance will be super Tuesday where the strength of her party machine will assist her. On a state by state basis Obama is proving too good a campainer.
Mind you, if she keeps bleeding support at her current rate the sponsor’s might pull the plug before then.
Don’t know that getting all red-eyed and teary will do anything to arrest the Clinton slide …
It also plays into the hands of those sexist b@stards who held up the “iron my shirt” signs …
Who wants the leader of the free world to “tear up” when faced with almighty challenge? they will say …
Obama by a mile …
Personally I’d like to see Edwards get up for the Democrats as he appears to have the best policies across the board. Whoever thought being a white male would be a disadvantage in American politics?
For the GOP I’d like to see Ron Paul get the nomination as the front-runners all seem rather toxic to me.
Having been an Obama fan from way back, I am just a little hesitant at a hint of
hawkishness coming through now.
Just hope he is just trying to show a bit of muscle to sway the power-hungry,but is in fact a dove underneath!
From the previous thread, Glen’s observation:
“Still he’s (Giuliani) not getting favourable press with his strategy and it should hurt him but really can the Republicans win the Election with a baptist minister, a morman or a senior citizen???? The only logical choice for them is Giuliani and if he’s not nominated the Republicans will have no shot whatsoever.”
Much as I am wary of saying never say never and all that…
…I happen to think the Repugs have no chance in ’08 no matter who they put up. Take the anger from ’04, treble it, then multiply by 50,000. That’s how badly the Dems want to win this time. Normally the Republicans are well on their way to endorsing a candidate by this stage – this time, they’re a mess. Their field is so thin that McCain, of all people, is being thrown around as the ‘establishment’ candidate! He’s already died and been resurrected politically once in this campaign. Face it, the Repugs have no-one that’s going to galvanise them into voting. The Dems have at least two (Obama and Edwards – together on a ticket they will be immensely tough to beat) and even Dems who don’t like Hillary will probably get out and vote if push came to shove.
Anyway, Giuliani is a nutcase, although I suppose that doesn’t exactly make him unique amongst the Repug field.
“Personally I’d like to see Edwards get up for the Democrats as he appears to have the best policies across the board.”
I agree. But I wouldn’t mind an Obama-Edwards ticket, even if it’s the ‘wrong’ way around…
Megan Hillary is struggling and she will be beaten significantly in NH, the Democratic primaries the way they work assist Obama and Clinton but i think in the end it will help Obama.
For the record McCain will win NH for the Republicans with Romney a distant second followed by Giuliani and then Huckleberry that’s my prediction.
Firstly Democratic Members of Congress have votes thus Hillary wins big in NY 39 votes to 1 but more even elsewhere. Nevertheless Obama will be greatly assisted by the fact that most Democrat primaries attribute delegates proportionally thus even if Clinton wins some big States Obama will pick up a significant portion aswell.
Dave, RP whose name should not be mentioned for fear of his crazy internet supporters coming on here is to put it plainly nuts. RP is in the wrong Party IMHO, and he’ll bow out after Feb 5. I hope Rudy Giuliani picks up the Republican nomination being a moderate Republican i think should help out in the big States he just has to sit tight and weather the early primaries and bad press for his strategy.
My biggest concern about Obama is that he’s never faced a genuinely contested race with the Republicans. The GOP candidates are so lacklustre that they will simply go negative from the start, Edwards and Clinton have dealt with that pressure before but Obama is untested.
Glen, I agree that RP is nuts, nominating him would be like the Liberals deciding to accept Prodos as a candidate. I’d still enjoy the sideshow though.
So long as the republicans pick either McCain or guiliani they will win, the republicans are the daddy party, so the presidency fits neatky with their strengths, plus noone is going to link any republican with the Bush whitehouse, and Bush’s approval rating will not affect the result
however the congressional approval rating will affect the democratis contenders, because they are members of the majority party, and are therefore part of the pelosi/murtha/reid group of what has become unpopular incompetants.
the presidential elction is the republicans to lose, and obama is all puff and no sunstance
Has anyone found a good US pollbludger equivalent?
11 Brisbaner:
The polls and betting markets contradict you.
What say you?
Being the Clintons one would not be surprised if they put someone up to the “iron my shirt” thing as a get out the sympathy measure.
http://edition.cnn.com/2008/POLITICS/01/08/nh.main/index.html
Citizens went to the polls in Dixville Notch a moment after midnight Tuesday to cast the first ballots in a 2008 presidential primary.
[‘Rick Erwin tallies the nation’s first primary votes in Dixville Notch, New Hampshire.
They gave Sen. John McCain an early lead in the GOP race and denied Sen. Hillary Clinton any votes in the Democratic contest.
McCain garnered four votes, followed by former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney with two and former New York Mayor Rudy Giuliani with one.
Sen. Barack Obama, fresh off a victory in the Iowa caucuses, was a favorite among Dixville Notch Democrats, with seven votes. Former Sen. John Edwards won two votes, and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson got one.
Clinton drew no votes among the 10 Democrats casting ballots in Dixville Notch, a hamlet of about 75 people near the Canadian border.
For the rest of the state, most polls open at 6 a.m.; the last close at 8 p.m.’]
A good liberal Democrat site is Daily Kos.
Francis- I like these two, the first being about Repub and the second Demo. But they have up to twenty threads running simultaneously staring on the same day!!
http://www.politico.com/blogs/jonathanmartin
http://www.politico.com/blogs/bensmith
I think Obama, then Edwards and Clinton in a close tie for second. Hopefully Richardson will drop out afterwards, he’s just waisting his time.
The Republican primary, like all things the republicans have done so far, should be hilarious. The longer it’s a 5 or 6 way fight, the more stuffed they will be by november. The repub candidates seem to really hate each other.
Predictions for NH Primary
Democrats
Obama
Clinton
Edwards
Richardson
Republicans
McCain
Romney
Giuliani
Huckabee
Paul
Hunter
Obama will win New Hampshire. The only interest is in the exacta for second. I’m hoping Edwards. If Obama becomes the eventual democratic elect, I hope he can overcome the redneck vote.
Let’s get fair dinkum, Obama would be good for the state the world is in right now, but if I had to have a bet, I’d be backing a republican at the odds for the presidency, unless Edwards is the Democratic candidate.
On the republican side, McCain is expected to win over Romney tomorrow but not as easily as Obama.
Everything the Republicans can throw at Clinton they already have. If Obama gets in we will just see swift-boating all over again. The key lesson of the 1999 primary, and the 2000 and 2004 elections was if you can define your opponent before they define themselves you do a lot of damage to them.
Clinton is a centre-left candidate, woman, married to Bill, likes healthcare. She is defined. The republicans have already tried to slander her and have failed. She will defeat the republican in an election. But with Obama as the candidate it becomes an open contest again! Sigh.
I understand the Democrat members want a left-wing candidate, but I don’t understand why they are shooting themselves in the collective foot.
I read once that progressives hate success of their own side. I used to disagree but times like this make me wonder … 🙂
12 – Frances
Try http://www.politics1.com
Not as good as our own Poll Bludger of course, but not too shabby at all…
Romney will probaby win republican in my view. He is tipped to come second in all the republican primaries/caucuses. And as no other candidate is comming consistantly first, comming second in South Carolina, New Hampshire, Nevada and florida will start to add upp. Giuiliani’s lead in Florida is not enough to counter that. Romney has also won Wyoming convinsingly.While Giuliani would probably do well in California on super Tuesday. A significant amount of medium sized states will show him some love. like his home Massachussetts, mid west states. Especially the home of Mormons Utah. (Prediction Romney 99% 😛 ). Mcain will take votes away from the others in plaes like Arizona and Maine. However it will remain close mayybe even after super tuesday and will be a war of attrition. I predict the real winner will be the democrats 🙂
dembo, I was of the view that Clinton is absolutely above everything else, in it for herself. She supported Dubya all the way over Iraq simply to make it difficult for Kerry in 04, obviously with her own super selfish interests in mind.
Now it’s fine for any politician to have ambitions, but she acted in the detriment of her party. Also Hillary is more centre right from what I could gather.
Actually Dembo, the polls show that Obama has a better chance against any Republican then Clinton.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/epolls/2008/president/national.html
Dave says: “My biggest concern about Obama is that he?s never faced a genuinely contested race with the Republicans.”
Indeed, and in fact Obama has never actually done anything. After a privileged upbringing he went from being editor of the Harvard Law Review in 1990 to the Illinois state legislature for a safe all-black district in 1996 to being elected virtually unopposed to the Senate all of three years ago. He has absolutely no record for anything except windy rhetoric of the “let’s all unite and feel good” type which Americans seem to love so much. If he didn’t have the novelty value of being black he would never even have thought of running for president.
It now appears that he may well be able to beat Clinton and bluff his way to the nomination, but if he is nominated the Repubs will absolutely eat him alive, particularly if they have enough brains left to nominate McCain, a man of real substance and integrity and with a distinguished personal and political record. Not only will they quite legitimately be able to attack Obama for his non-existent record and experience, and for the shallowness of his policies, which are mostly just slogans, they will also run a covert racist campaign that will undermine his support everywhere except on the liberal coasts. Given Bush’s record, the Repubs ought to be heading for a massive defeat in November, but the Dems might just have found a way to lose again – by nominating a candidate with zero credentials to be president and massive vulnerability to the kind of dirt campaign the Repubs do so well. It’s hard to credit, really.
adam
“If he didn’t have the novelty value of being black he would never even have thought of running for president.”
Can you substantiate that remark
Adam 25, are you from Queensland?
I would like to have a better understanding of how this nomination process works for both camps. What reading I have done so far has just served to further confuse me (admittedly not that difficult).
So far it seems that the votes in some state’s primary / caucus / hybrid / whatever, are binding on the eventual respective convention delegates and some are not, while the process in some states is conducted on a winner take all approach and in other states on a proportional approach, with yet other delegates being selected by the party organization in certain states. Some votes appear to be cast secretly while others seem to involve a show of hands, or standing in a corner of a room.
Meanwhile some states appear to have lost either all or half their entitlement to their party’s convention delegates for ‘going early’.
Also, it seems that people can roll up with a choice of participating in either the Democrat or Republican process. Is it a free for all available to any mug citizen, or do people actually have to have some sort of party affiliation to participate?
Can anyone please suggest a website(s) regarding each party that makes a reasonably clear and preferably succinct explanation of the process involved?
Finally, I read somewhere that come the actual presidential election itself, an independent candidate could stand but might only be able to get onto the ballot in some states (but not others). Can someone please explain how that works?
Brenton, everything you would ever likely need/want to know about Adam can be found by clicking on his name.
Oh, on re-reading my last post (29) sounded like I was being narky,
srry Adam, I didn’t mean it to sound like that
There is less of a policy gap between the leading Democrats than their partisans admit. The Republican’s only prospects are McCain and Guliani who have a cross-over appeal, however they are unpopular with the conservative base and their hawkish foreign policy views would be a liability in an election. Romney is the Brendan Nelson of American politics. Huckabee would terrify country-club Republicans into abstaining or voting for an independent
Barack Hussein Obama – as described by Gerard Henderson – will be the next President of the United States. His appeal is to the non-partisans. he will galvanize the unaligned voter. Expect the largest ever turnout in November – people who have never voted in their lives. And they will vote for Howard and Hendersons mate Obama. BTW I assume the Australian media, including Laurie Oakes, will follow up with Howard when Obama claims the nomination, and ask if he stands by his comments as Prime Minister that terrorists will be praying for an Obama victoy.
Well, call me narrowly focussed, but Howard’s idiotic and demented attack on Obama is what sways me to cheer Barack on.
It would be just another sweet nail in Rodent’s coffin of global irrelevance if Obama won Pres.
Geoffrey @ 30 –
The US Presidential Primary process is as heterogeneous as you describe. I’ve lived in 3 US states over my years (still a US citizen, for that matter), and each of these have been “primary” states. A primary is where the entire public can cast a ballot for the candidate of their choice. In some states you need to be pre-registered as a member of the party; in other states, with “open” primaries (such as NH) you can declare party affiliation when you walk into the polls, and then un-declare that affiliation on the way out.
Caucuses seem (to my untrained eyes) rather closer to the Australian process of party pre-selection for candidates – tiny, raucous, and highly liable to all the vicissitudes of branch-stacking.
The end result is to select most of the 4100-ish delegates to the Democratic convention, and the 3000-ish delegates to the Republican convention. Only the majority of those delegates are selected directly by voters. Others, known as “superdelegates” are party officials and elected officials of their respective parties; they are free to cast their votes as they please.
The entire national primary/caucus system emerged in the post-WW I period, and didn’t really take its final form until the 1940s; before that, candidates were selected in “smoke-filled rooms”, where cigar-puffing pollies picked a candidate without any input from the electorate. While this process had the advantage of consensus-building, the trend toward direct election of convention delegates has given more breadth to the candidates available to either party.
As for getting onto the Presidential ballot, each state holds its own election on the first Tuesday in November; thus, each candidate must file with the respective Secretary of State the paperwork to get them on the ballot. This often means they have to file a requisite number of signatures (somewhere between 100 and 10,000, depending on the size of the state) of registered voters who indicate their desire to have that candidate on the ballot. This is not a substantial barrier to any candidate running a national campaign: the presidential ballot in California (where I voted in 1992, 1996, and 2000) had at least eight different candidates running for president. Still, there are fifty states, and you’ve got to get paperwork filed with each state at some time long before the election (generally 90 days). Some candidates can’t manage that.
This Wikipedia entry might help out a bit:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_States_presidential_primary
Also, in answer to a few other questions here, TPM Election Central is a good place to look at the current polls & tracking polls…
http://tpmelectioncentral.com/
Ah, just six weeks from our poll to their poll. Glory!
Ah, nice to see one’s money at work, and even more so when one’s heart is in it too. As noted, my money has been on Obama for quite a while, (plus a side bet on Huckabee/McCain), so yes, I’m relaxed and comfortable for now.
I disagree with Adam about Obama, he can easily beat any of the Repulicans for President, and it’s more than being about a ‘shoping list’ of so called ‘achievements’ of so called ‘experienced’ politicians from Washington.
Achievements? Just take a look at America, take a look at the mess, from not even noticing 19 young men training to fly planes into your iconic buildings, to bungled wars in Afghanistan and Iraq, and a city flooded with thousands stranded in their own bodily wastes while the President rode around his holiday farm.
Achievements? Point to some, by any of them, left or right, it’s all the same. The country is wallowing in debt, financial scams of horrendous proportions, a tsunami of social security obligations they cannot possibly meet, and a Whitehouse run by a cabal of neocon nutters who think the Likud party and Mossad should be running the countries foreign policy, (and it does!!)
Achievements? Show me some! Anything!
Obama has the mojo working, has gotten the pulse of this p!ssed off country, and is riding the wave of its discontent with all things Washington…all the way to Washington.
Spare me the ‘achievements’ or the ‘experience’ or whatever it is that got them where they are.
They DO NOT WISH TO BE THERE!
Enter, Obama.
Make that “country’s” in my last past, and I’ll stand by every word of it.
The thing I’ve come to realize – talking to my American mates – is that there really does seem to be some sort of massive sea-change going on in the US right now. Obama is electrifying. My mates have seen him speak, and they’ve come away believers.
All this talk about “electability” is nothing but pure spin. Obama is entirely electable, and – given that the US isn’t likely to put another Republican in the White House for at least a generation – this is his moment. It’s just really bad timing that Hillary waited until 2008. She could have gone after W. in 2004 – she had the opportunity, the means, and the motive – but she didn’t want the fight. Instead, she and her wing of the party supported Kerry desultorily. The result: Kerry lost, leaving the path clear for 2008. (Oh, and we all got another 4 years of W.) But Hillary miscalculated. She didn’t understand just how badly Americans would want to turn the page – not just on the last 7 years, but on the last 15 years.
Good to hear from Adam again, he is supporting Hilary.
Adam what makes you think that the Repubilicans will not do the same with boring Hilary.
And another thing is America a democracy Adam? A country where less than 50 percent of people vote and you need large amounts of money to run. That is not a democracy.
Adam
what do you think of Hilary’s chances?
Just read some interesting figures. The war in Iraq has cost the USA $483,836,000,000. The USA National Debt since the Bush Presidency has soared from $6,400,000,000,000 to $9,203,000,000,000. No wonder Americans are looking for fresh hope and hopefully for someone who is better at maths!
Yes, but does that take in to account efforts to make the pie higher, Brenton?
People, ranting about the evils of Bush (about which I mostly agree with you) is not an adequate reply to my post above about Obama. Bush will not be a candidate. In that sense it will not be a re-run of Howard v Rudd. It will be as if Howard retired before the election and Petro Georgiou had replaced him. If the Repubs are smart enough to nominate McCain (a big if, I agree), they will have a candidate with no links to the Bush administration, who was in fact Bush’s opponent for the nomination in 2000, and who has a vastly superior CV to Obama’s.
Yes Marky, the Repubs will do a smear job on whoever the Dems nominate, and yes Clinton has plenty of negatives of her own (although I don’t agree she is boring), but she has much more credibility than Obama. The Dems don’t have a perfect candidate (since Al Gore decided not to run), but Clinton is the best they have. The allegation that Obama has no qualifications to be president will not be a smear, it will be a fact, and McCain will flog it for all it’s worth. That, on top of the Bradley effect and the covert racist campaign the Repub grassroots will run, would make Obama’s job very difficult, whatever the polls say now.
You are all also making a big mistake in assuming that just because Americans have gone sour on Bush and the Iraq war, they have suddenly turned into hairy peaceniks. They haven’t, and regardless of the crimes of Bush they won’t vote for a candidate who is seen as soft on national security or terrorism. In a McCain v Obama race, McCain would have this issue all to himself, since Obama has no record at all, personally or politically. Also his middle name is Hussein, which no doubt the Repubs will draw everyone’s attention to at every opportunity.
http://www.shopmetrospy.com/cgi-bin/sc-v4/shopmecprod2.pl?client=shopmetro&catid=63&PRID=421
KR @37.
your post is spot on.
Adam can’t see past his *centre/right neocon nose* to see whats going on.
* socially liberal,right-wing everything else.
The people have never liked politicians, but the lot that have been in Washington the last decade are absolute poison to the people.
They don’t want any of them. Obama is the closest thing they’ve got to a big broom to sweep all the shit away. How he turns out is problematic and really not important.
Right now he offers Hope and he will win the Presidency easily.
Actually Adam, if you meant me , I wasnt replying to your post at all!
I think Obama should be pleased to be attacked by a completely nutcase website as linked in Adam’s post. Some of the other T-shirts were
Guns don’t kill People. Abortion Clinics Kill People.
My Jesus can Beat Your Allah
Kill Il Jong
9 of 10 terrorists agree…A democrat congress is good for Jihad.
Peace Through Superior Firepower
You can tell as much about someone by their enemies as by their friends.
Adam, don’t you think that Hillary’s high negatives are a very important negative?
Clinton will survive until at least Super Duper Tuesday simply on the basis that she has the money to keep going until then. Even then there might still be some cash in the piggie bank and she could keep going even if she by then she has no chance of winning the actual nomination simply out of spite.
I expect her to lose tomorrow and South Carolina. Then media’s love affair (and my own for that matter) with Obama will end at some stage. But if it is not before Feb. 5th then he will have it in the bag.
Bill Richardson will make a fine Secretary of State. Edwards is not sticking around to be VP again. If there is little chance of winning after tomorrow, he will stay just to hurt Clinton and keep a profile to have a crack at the election for Governor in South Carolina in 2010 or North Carolina this year.
Adam whilst your points are valid ones’ in a country full of innuendo and ugliness, and i agree with some, i for one think Obama can overcome them or Edwards if he is the candidate.
People i think are seeing through smear and trickery as was seen in Australia last year. People also do not like the Republicans due to the Iraq war and America is moving towards a nasty slowdown. Obama can win because he has the ability to overcome smear through his charisma and intelligence. Only two things worry me about Obama the white vote and the possibility that some wacko will kill him.