Thursday, May 01, 2008

Electoral Predictions

I went out on a limb last fall and predicted Hillary Clinton would be the next president. (Actually, I may have said the same thing as early as 2005.) The meteoric rise of Barack Obama caught me off guard, as did the unimpressive Republican victory of perennial conservative punching bag John McCain. A month ago, Hillary winning even the Democratic nomination seemed unlikely, but thanks to Obama's troubles, the Democratic race once again seems to be a toss up. Predicting the eventual nominee is difficult, seeing as the unelected super delegates should be making the final choice come August at the Democratic National Convention. Based mostly on gut feeling, I think Hillary would defeat McCain in the general election, but Obama would lose is a very close race.

Why? As I think I've mentioned before, I think that should their candidate lose, more Hillary voters would turn to McCain than would Obama voters. Similarly, Hillary's support seems to be strongest (mostly) in red states and swing states. For instance, I could very well see Hillary beating McCain in Ohio and Pennsylvania. I can't really say the same thing for Obama. We tend to talk so broadly about the general election that we forget that it'll probably come down to 4 or 5 populous swing states. It really doesn't matter what Democrat is stronger in California or Texas, because the Democrats are going to win California and the Republicans are going to win Texas.


Anonymous b.rose said...

I'm not an expert here, but from all accounts Obama is going to have the popular vote and the electoral delegates over Hillary barring a miracle.

You really think the super-delegates are going to overturn that and risk alienating all of the blacks and young people who hopped on their socialist bandwagon this year? I sure hope so.

If the socialists find a way to lose this year, after the sentiment the Bush administration has created, maybe they'll realize that they should go back to being democrats and not socialists.

10:20 AM  
Blogger lonely libertarian said...

Here's the thing though- Obama is not going to have enough delegate votes before the convention, so it's going to come down to the super delegates and what they decide at the convention.

The super delegates should serve some sort of point- if all they did was reflect the pre-existing popular vote, then why have them in the first place?

I think the question the delegates will ask is who is more likely to put them in the White House come 2009. You're going to have a number of spurned supporters and swing voters and the super delegates will probably make their decision based on who's feelings will be hurt least.

12:45 PM  
Anonymous b.rose said...

If they have the balls to spurn a black man who won the popular vote and has more delegates going in, good for them.

But there's a reason Obama and Hillary have the same policy positions on EVERYTHING. Because they are the party of doing whatever is popular at the time. I mean John Kerry is the ultimate caricature and personification of everything that parties about right now. If the poll's say 50+1% of people support it, then they do. 50+1% of people supported Barack in their elections, they won't have the balls to take that away. Besides, taking it away from a black man would be so not PC.

1:57 PM  

Post a Comment

<< Home