So lets look back at my predictions and what actually happened.
predictions
REP
Romney to edge Huckabee who has been revealed to be a bit of a jerk.
Guiliani & Thompson to do very poorly.
Ron Paul to do suprisingly well. Say 10 %.
Dems
Obama to edge hillary or Edwards.
Biden to suprise and finish 3rd based on his foreign policy experience and the situation in Pakistan.
Actual
http://abcnews.go.com/politics/elections/
"Estimated Delegates: 57Democratic Primary ResultsThursday, January 3
Real-time Race Results: Updated January 5, 2008 - 2:35 PM (all times Eastern Standard)
Precincts Reporting 100%
Candidate Votes Vote % Delegates Projected Winner
Obama 940 38% 18 Winner
Edwards 744 30% 16
Clinton 737 29% 16
Richardson 53 2% 0
Biden 23 1% 0
Uncommitted 3 0% 0
Dodd 1 0% 0
Gravel 0 0% 0
Kucinich 0 0% 0
.
Estimated Delegates: 40Republican Primary ResultsThursday, January 3
Real-time Race Results: Updated January 5, 2008 - 2:35 PM (all times Eastern Standard)
Precincts Reporting 98%
Candidate Votes Vote % Delegates Projected Winner
Huckabee 40,841 34% 30 Winner
Romney 29,949 25% 7
Thompson 15,904 13% 0
McCain 15,559 13% 0
Paul 11,817 10% 0
Giuliani 4,097 4% 0
Hunter 524 1% 0 "
Huckabee joins Pat Robertson as a religious nutjob who swept through Iowa with hurricane force. Huckabee has a slim chance that he may not implode like Robertson. He is a very personable guy who spouts crazy in his free time and the next primaries will have very little time between each one, so someone who makes a good first impression can gain a lot of momentum quickly. That said, his political and religious views won't sell in New Hampshire (Primary #2). He could be seen as possibly irrelevant entering the Michigan Primary (Primary #3), which may really blunt any momentum he could have in South Carolina (Primary #4). On the positive side, having Ed Rollins on board guarantees he will meet his potential.
Romney started setting expectations that he would not win Iowa last week (I didn't know that) and that second was fine. That was IMO a political mistake. His people should have gotten agressive with Huckabee's past and his general cruel remarks to others. Romney easily could have cut the margin of victory in half or won if he hadn't written off Iowa. He also could have had Huckabee emerging as victorious, but permanently dogged by the Arkansas rape/murder scandal and not viable nationally, but he let him off the hook. Lesson to be learned, Mr. Romney, just because you might lose a race, doesn't mean you can't gain something of value by fighting. It is well known how much time and money Romney put into Iowa. A soft finish was not acceptable considering that. Now Romney has negative momentum entering a New Hampshire race that McCain is poised to win. It was fine for Romney to finish second in Iowa, but not by almost 10 percent. Romney could very well implode.
Thompson and McCain did suprisingly well drawing 13% of the vote each . Thompson lives for another week and McCain has momemtum going into New Hampshire where he is a strong second to the faltering Romney.
The radical Ron Paul has shown enough support to actually be entering VP consideration. Weird how the world works.
Guliani did much worse than I thought. He was expecting to get his 10-15% and fight another day. 4% when you were expecting 15% is to carry negative momentum into the next primary. He is in real trouble. He could implode with an unexpectedly bad showing in New Hampshire. He isn't likeable, and if he starts faltering, people will pile on.
Duncan Hunter should drop out of the race. He is done and unlike Ron Paul or Tom Tancredo he has no "issue to push".
On the Democratic side, WOW, what a night. The fact that Dem voter turnout for the primary (230K) was almost DOUBLE last election (124K)is hugely telling. For a long time now, Democratic analysts have smugly said that the Dems like their feild of candidates. I have long though that was overstated and that when push came to shove, one of the anti-hillary candidates would implode. Push came to shove last night and all 3 candidates drew record numbers. Hillary clinton's "disappointing" 29% third place finish would have netted her 54% of the vote in 2004. That is a landslide win!
The facts are Hillary drew her votes for who she is and should take pride in that. The troubling part of this is that her negative numbers made her vulnerable in this primary and would again do so in the national election --- especially against a likeable religious nutjob like Huckabee. This primary basically underscored "the problem with Hillary" for the Dem insiders. Hillary may deliver record numbers to the polls for her, but the more successful she is, ther more motivated the anti-Hillary voters will be to keep her out.
It looks VERY dark for Hillary. A big loss to Obama was possible and probably there was a contingency plan. Losing to Edwards as well changes the equation. The idea of Hillary as the inevitable candidate is gone forever. Hillary will have a dogfight from here on out and she does poorly in those, allowing her abrasive and evasive sides out, which reinforce the negative views people have of her. Additionally, she has already squandered all of her Obama "mud". I think she may be done.
Edwards ran a brilliant campaign on class struggle and being the anti-Hillary. Both campaign groups should look at that. Forget Obama for a second and look at the race as Hillary vs. Anti-Hillary (Edwards). Anti-hillary won like 69K vs. 67K. That should tell you all you need to know about edwards and clinton. That would be a high turnout in Iowa for normal but a heated race. These two candidates scooped up all of the established Dem Vote. And the anti-Hillary won.
Obama may not like him, but Edwards makes a world of sense as his VP today. He has really come into his own, is from the right region/background to compliment Obama, and as proven last election, he can handle a debate and attack a presidential candidate. All that said, Edwards is not done yet. He has 2-3 Primaries to make his case before he runs out of money. If the politically nieve Obama trips up in New Hampshire and Hillary continues to struggle, the door could open up again for Edwards and he could get some real traction.
Both candidates scraped up every vote they could, but the numbers don't lie, Double the turnout? Obama wins with women by 5%? This was the Goddess of Harpo gently touching Iowa on the map and the Obama phone support crew diligently recording every touch. Oprah is a political dynamo. Obama should have 2 people on his VP want list. Oprah, then Edwards.
Which finally leads me to the rest of the Democratic feild. Biden and Dodds rightly bailed. Dodds has been dead for months, but getting less than 1% finally opened his eyes. Biden (and a lot of prognosticators including myself) felt he would have a strong shouwing in Iowa ---probably in the teens. A lot of his strategy was based on proving himself viable in Iowa and making a move in New Hampshire. Without the first, the second became impossible. I am sad to see him get out this early because I think he was the one democrat capable of crushing a Republican candidate with criticism. (He did it to Guiliani earlier in the race. When he publically stated that Guiliani was running on 9/11 he cut off the Mayor's only means of positive momentum. This is the only time I have ever seen a fringe candidate take down an opponent's front runner.) I think Biden ultimately did little to show a domestic agenda and that killed him.
Gravel is in it to the bitter end. He has a message, but is not sending it clearly. Kucinich will probably get out in a few more races as he realizes that you can't get a race to adopt your platforms, at best you can hope that the race seizes on one issue you treasure like Tancredo was able to accomplish with his presidency. Richardson is in a similar boat to Kucinich and Biden. He hasn't seen what Biden did, that the big 3 have choked out all the sunlight.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment