Skip to main content

So I got lucky as hell with my Iowa predictions, but can I successfully pull out numbers from you-know-where two elections in a row? I would certainly bet against it. The big challenge here is trying to figure out where the independent vote will go. If they decide to cast a Democratic ballot, Obama wins huge. If they decide to cast a Republican one, Obama wins less big.

My predictions:

Obama     45
Clinton   26
Edwards   21

I'm conflicted about whether to attempt a prediction for the Republican side. Fact is, I just don't get their psychology, and had I attempted a prediction for the GOP results in Iowa, I would've been wildly off the mark. But what the hell, how can people trash me if I don't make an ass out of myself with hilariously wrong predictions? So here goes:

Romney    34
McCain    33
Huckabee  13
Paul      12
Giulaini   4
Thompson   3

I'm going to buck CW since I've predicted above that independents will turn out for Obama, and those numbers would come out of McCain's potential voter pool. The more likely scenario is for McCain to win by 4-6 points, but I'll go out on that limb. No guts, no glory, right? Or just wishful thinking -- A solid McCain victory, followed by a solid Huckabee victory in South Carolina, makes this a two-man race. If Romney can pull NH off narrowly, then we have a three person clusterfuck, with plenty of opportunities for Giuliani to weasel his way back in the race in a fragmented field.

I am so rooting for "clusterfuck", even dreaming of a brokered GOP convention where Huckabee has a plurality of delegates, but still shy of the needed total, and is brushed aside (along with his theocon army) as Newt Gingrich sweeps in to save the day. Ahhh ... happy thoughts....

Originally posted to Daily Kos on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:25 AM PST.

Your Email has been sent.
You must add at least one tag to this diary before publishing it.

Add keywords that describe this diary. Separate multiple keywords with commas.
Tagging tips - Search For Tags - Browse For Tags


More Tagging tips:

A tag is a way to search for this diary. If someone is searching for "Barack Obama," is this a diary they'd be trying to find?

Use a person's full name, without any title. Senator Obama may become President Obama, and Michelle Obama might run for office.

If your diary covers an election or elected official, use election tags, which are generally the state abbreviation followed by the office. CA-01 is the first district House seat. CA-Sen covers both senate races. NY-GOV covers the New York governor's race.

Tags do not compound: that is, "education reform" is a completely different tag from "education". A tag like "reform" alone is probably not meaningful.

Consider if one or more of these tags fits your diary: Civil Rights, Community, Congress, Culture, Economy, Education, Elections, Energy, Environment, Health Care, International, Labor, Law, Media, Meta, National Security, Science, Transportation, or White House. If your diary is specific to a state, consider adding the state (California, Texas, etc). Keep in mind, though, that there are many wonderful and important diaries that don't fit in any of these tags. Don't worry if yours doesn't.

You can add a private note to this diary when hotlisting it:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from your hotlist?
Are you sure you want to remove your recommendation? You can only recommend a diary once, so you will not be able to re-recommend it afterwards.
Rescue this diary, and add a note:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary from Rescue?
Choose where to republish this diary. The diary will be added to the queue for that group. Publish it from the queue to make it appear.

You must be a member of a group to use this feature.

Add a quick update to your diary without changing the diary itself:
Are you sure you want to remove this diary?
(The diary will be removed from the site and returned to your drafts for further editing.)
(The diary will be removed.)
Are you sure you want to save these changes to the published diary?

Comment Preferences

  •  Romney is weeks away from cutting his losses, IMO (8+ / 0-)

    Dudehisattva... <div style="color: #0000a0;">"Generosity, Ethics, Patience, Effort, Concentration, and Wisdom"&l

    by Dood Abides on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:27:23 AM PST

  •  The Dems seem obvious... (21+ / 0-)

    Obama 41
    Clinton 28
    Edwards 25

    The Repugs...

    McCain 37
    Romney 32
    Huckabee 15
    Paul 11
    Thompson 8
    Giulana... not a lot. nowhere can you find a smaller, more irrelevant group of morally bankrupt sycophants with the IQ of a dozen decapitated squirrels.

    by JeffLieber on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:27:50 AM PST

  •  DFQs predictions (10+ / 0-)

    obama 44, Clinton 28, Edwards 23


    McCain 32
    Romney 31
    Huckabee 14
    Paul 12
    Giuliani 8
    Others 3

    I shall not rest until right wing conservatives are 4th party gadflies limited to offering minor corrections on legislation once or twice a year.

    by davefromqueens on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:28:26 AM PST

  •  I would love to see Edwards (8+ / 0-)

    take second, but I doubt that will happen.  I'll settle for a close third (as if I have a choice).

    Any party that would lie to start a war would also steal an election.

    by landrew on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:28:58 AM PST

    •  Me too. (0+ / 0-)

      Obama 44 (!)
      Clinton 30
      Edwards 24

      McCain 30
      Romney 28
      Huck   15
      Rudee  10
      Paul   10
      Fred    6

      I'm officially Obama'd!

      by MichaelPH on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:48:09 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I don't think Rudy gets that much (0+ / 0-)

        I think he's down around 3 or 4%. New Hampshire = anti-New York City. I remember one guy in a Rochester, NH convenience store go ballistic on me when I asked if he carried the Boston Globe or New York Times. That was my introduction of New Hampshire.

        You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war..... Albert Einstein,

        by tazz on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:10:50 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

    •  Even a close third in NH would be a major victory (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Heart of the Rockies

      for Edwards, given that he was trailing Clinton for an average of twenty points in the state all year.

      And I say this as an Obama supporter.

      If Edwards can get within a few points of Clinton, it's a double whammy for her in addition to losing another big contest to Obama.  After all, January 3 reminded all of us what some of us never should have forgotten: expectations are everything.

      Do we really want Rudy, Romney, or Huckabee to be able to turn to our nominee in 2008 and say "you voted for this war and I didn't"? Think about it.

      by ShadowSD on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:50:50 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  May be off topic (0+ / 0-)

    but I just wanted to know. I just started seriously following the race, and have a couple of questions.

    Isn't it true that Obama is more  of a centrist than Hillary? Aren't people considering that Hillary would be polarizing and that Obama is wants to bring every one to the table, and appealing more to the independents. Am I missing something here? The polls show that Hillary is more popular among democrats, while Obama's lead comes in with the independents. How can we assume that Hillary is centrist and Obama more progressive?

    •  Hillary generally regarded as more centrist (10+ / 0-)

      ...due to her votes on foreign policy.

      But, whichever candidate you support, you will call the other one "centrist," and you can make the "centrist" case for any of our top 3.

      Oh, the hills are groaning with excess, like a table ceaselessly being set.

      by faithfull on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:32:03 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Not at All (2+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        milton333, Ky DEM

        Barack Obama is running way to the right of the other candidates on everything except for foreign policy.  And his is totally incoherent.  Something about bombing Pakistan.  If you look at his platform, you see a ticky-tacky list of half-measures designed to appease corporation interests.

        It's kind of crazy, but it looks like we might be choosing the next moderate Republican as our Democratic Party nominee.

        I am a retired candidate diarist.

        by bink on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:34:41 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  ??? (19+ / 0-)

          yeah, sure. whatever

          In the United States, doing good has come to be, like patriotism, a favorite device of persons with something to sell. - Mencken

          by agnostic on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:37:00 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  No, Really (9+ / 0-)

            I wish people would read his policy materials and listen to what he is telling you.

            He is telling you, "I am the Unity candidate."  He is telling you, "I am the middle road between George W. Bush and Hillary Clinton."

            The New York Times has an interesting article today about the Republican Unity movement -- one of the things that they mention is that Unity Republicans feel like there might be no need for Bloomberg, because they already have Obama.

            Of course, we're so busy screaming our heads off about Hillary "attacking" Obama that no one will investigate this candidate and think about what he stands for.

            He is indeed a Manchurian candidate -- but not for Islam, for center-right corporate-friendly interests of the moderate, country-club Republican set.

            I am a retired candidate diarist.

            by bink on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:39:25 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  You are hearing things (8+ / 0-)

              He has said nothing of the sort.

            •  I have my own problems with my senator (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:

              I don't like his "Present" vote on abortion.  I don't like the games he played with the gay bashing evangelist.  There are a dozen other things I don't like about the guy.  But last night with the people empowered thing, he sure sounded like Howard Dean.  Maybe the message that the American people get to take back the American government is bigger than the messengers.  Meantime, Edwards is looking pretty good to me too.

              You can be as free as you want, so long as Republicans control birth, death, sex and marriage. And whose vote counts.

              by ultrageek on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:43:06 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  which is why planned parenthood (5+ / 0-)

                honored him and support him

                In the United States, doing good has come to be, like patriotism, a favorite device of persons with something to sell. - Mencken

                by agnostic on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:47:11 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

                •  My problems are obviously not their problems (1+ / 0-)
                  Recommended by:

                  Planned Parenthood.  Fine.  You wanna tell me that Gloria Steinem disagrees with me too?  How 'bout Hillary Clinton?  I'll bet that Hillary has a lot of things to say on the subject... and being the highest ranking woman in this discussion, obviously, I'm gonna subjugate everything I think and adopt everything she says is right.


                  I said they're my problems... I said so right up front.  I didn't say squat about what other women may think.  I have a problem with his "present" vote.  I said that at the time of the Illinois Senate primary, and I got some other condescending jerk telling me to shut up too.  (and if you don't think you were being a condescending jerk telling me to shut up, then reread what I said then what you said).  Like what Planned Parenthood thinks should be more important to me than what I think.  Like I shouldn't be concerned when a guy I'm gonna wind up working my ass off for can't bother to stand up and say that I have the right to control my own uterus.

                  Similarly, I don't understand why you care if I have a problem with him.  It's my problem.  I said it before.  My issue.  Am I so powerful that I speak for every woman on earth?  Or should I let any other woman or women's group speak for me, because it's smarter than I am?  Or more engaged?

                  I find that presumptuous and insulting.
                  I had a friend once who was reading the Top 100 Books of the Twentieth Century.  For fun.  And would review them on his website.

                  And, at one point, he said something like he found so-and-so longwinded.  Well, some yahoo came back and said that this person and that person and the other person thought otherwise, and who was he to disagree with them.  He responded that it was his opinion, and he was uniquely able to convey his opinion, and that no one else's opinion had anything to do with it.

                  So it is with me and my Senator.  I am a woman.  I don't like that he hasn't stood up for my right to self determination.  I am gay.  I don't like that he invites fagbashers onto his stage.  I am an Illinoisian.  I don't like that he's not doing his work in the Senate... Chris Dodd sure seemed to be able to find time to do his work in the Senate.  And I'm a Jew... and I'm a little hesitant to be working my ass off for someone who conveys so much charisma.

                  My Problems.  Mine.  Not anyone else's.

                  And I could give a SHIT what Planned Parenthood thinks.

                  You can be as free as you want, so long as Republicans control birth, death, sex and marriage. And whose vote counts.

                  by ultrageek on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:05:27 AM PST

                  [ Parent ]

                  •  TROLL RATING? you little piece of (3+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:
                    GreatDane, trashablanca, ibinreno

                    hillarian. Ever read the rules here? Obviously not.

                    In the United States, doing good has come to be, like patriotism, a favorite device of persons with something to sell. - Mencken

                    by agnostic on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:20:01 AM PST

                    [ Parent ]

                    •  I troll rated for the... (1+ / 0-)
                      Recommended by:

                      What-you-think-isn't-important-what-Planned-Parenthood-thinks-is-important-shut-up-and-don't-raise-a ny-questions-about-choice-you-should-fall-into-line.

                      I hate the shut-up-and-fall-into-line crap.

                      But, I'll untrollrate you.

                      Because I've learned how to shut up and fall into line.

                      You can be as free as you want, so long as Republicans control birth, death, sex and marriage. And whose vote counts.

                      by ultrageek on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:33:28 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                    •  Hilliarn (0+ / 0-)


                      You can be as free as you want, so long as Republicans control birth, death, sex and marriage. And whose vote counts.

                      by ultrageek on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:34:15 AM PST

                      [ Parent ]

                      •  thank you. (0+ / 0-)

                        boy, you sure read a lot into ten little words, none of which referred to
                        being jewish

                        may I politely suggest that you ease off the caffeine? Life is way too short to stress out like that.

                        In the United States, doing good has come to be, like patriotism, a favorite device of persons with something to sell. - Mencken

                        by agnostic on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:37:48 AM PST

                        [ Parent ]

                        •  If you don't see it as a gender thing (0+ / 0-)

                          I think you're being obtuse.

                          Some women are sensitive to being told they're stupid, or that their opinions don't matter, or that they shouldn't worry their pretty little heads.  Doctors treat women as if their concerns don't matter every stinking day.  Car dealers treat women as if they're the "little lady" every stinking day.  Every day, somewhere in America, a woman experiences sexism, just as, every day, somewhere in America, some Jew experiences anti-semitism and some gay experiences homophobia.

                          I come to dKos, and I have for a long time, and I don't expect to have my concerns for my body pooh-poohed, and heartfelt opinions belittled.  Of course, women have seen sexism by the bushelful on this site, and that's what the whole "pie" thing is all about.

                          Anyway.  If you don't see that you can invoke all these things and more, and in ten little words or less, you're underestimating your ability to pick 'em.

                          You can be as free as you want, so long as Republicans control birth, death, sex and marriage. And whose vote counts.

                          by ultrageek on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 11:14:04 AM PST

                          [ Parent ]

                          •  and everyday (0+ / 0-)

                            a woman also experiences other, minor rejections, based on other things than gender.  Agnostic telling you what Planned Parenthood did seems pretty clearly to be one of those, not a case of saying your opinion doesn't matter or you're stupid.  If you think Agnostic invoked all that with 10 little words, then somebody is being obtuse ...  I don't think it's Agnostic.

                          •  And you'd know all about this, huh? (0+ / 0-)

                            The object of the experimental procedure was Senator Hillary Clinton, the former First Lady who was born human, but de-humanized through a series of procedures over two decades.  Clinton was voluntarily 'emasculated' by a group of specialists from her husband's campaign who feared the impact of a woman who worked and spoke out on issues of concern to her.  

                            The process continued with an invasive feminization surgery in early 2000, in which damaged auditory nerves were replaced in time for her successful "Listening Tour."  

                            This was the first real sign of progress in the field of humanization/dehumanization, when an emascualated woman was re-feminized sufficiently to listen, a hobby for which she had shown no previous inclination.

                            Very funny.  Not at all gender based.  Nosireebob.  No, us women are just too sensitive...

                            You can be as free as you want, so long as Republicans control birth, death, sex and marriage. And whose vote counts.

                            by ultrageek on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 03:46:39 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  ultra, I just had an opponent, (1+ / 0-)
                            Recommended by:

                            a female atty, accuse me of the same thing that you did.

                            Except, my curmudgeonly behavior (covering my actual professional courtesy and respect for ALL opponents, regardless of color, race, religion, size, shape, or whether all of their teeth are their own) is the same to everyone.

                            To some extent, I owe you thanks. What might be fair, appropriate and curmudgeonly to some male opponents, might be viewed as oppressive to female opponents. Thank you for waking me up and letting me know that a difference exists.

                            In the United States, doing good has come to be, like patriotism, a favorite device of persons with something to sell. - Mencken

                            by agnostic on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 03:56:08 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  My pleasure (0+ / 0-)

                            Thank you for taking it so well.  

                            Best wishes going forward.

                            You can be as free as you want, so long as Republicans control birth, death, sex and marriage. And whose vote counts.

                            by ultrageek on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 04:12:46 PM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                          •  Oh, and fwiw... (0+ / 0-)

                            I've always liked you.  :)

                            You can be as free as you want, so long as Republicans control birth, death, sex and marriage. And whose vote counts.

                            by ultrageek on Wed Jan 09, 2008 at 07:23:20 AM PST

                            [ Parent ]

                  •  You trollrated (1+ / 0-)
                    Recommended by:

                    for your disagreement???

                    Abuse of power perhaps?

            •  Agree (0+ / 0-)

              It's a bit foggy, he wants to get out of the left/right talking points, but how can you do so when the other side is not ready to compromise? I found that his healthcare plan is right leaning. Other than that he is progressive on most other issues.

              My question is, how can you get the republicans to accept abortion rights, and more importantly stem cell research, if you go middle of the way? I like edwards a bit with his confrontational approach, but can he win the general? Hillary may win the general, but will she be as agressive as edwards?

              Am I asking too many questions ;)? But i'd definitely like a real progressive after bush though.

        •  Jesus f'in... (17+ / 0-)

          Barack Obama has a 97.5% liberal rating from the ADA, highest of any candidate in the race.  Hillary's is respectable, but Barack Obama has never been part of the DLC, whose charter is architected around the very word "centrist."

          So.  Please.

        •  Bomb Pakistan?? (9+ / 0-)

          He talked about going after Bin Laden, not bombing Pakistan.  In the debate all the dems seems to agree with him that going after Bin Laden would be a good idea.

          •  Yes but how many innocents would he kill? (0+ / 0-)

            He said he would bomb Pakistan if he thought Bin Laden was there but the Pakistanis disagreed. How many innocent Pakis would he be willing to kill until proved wrong? Bush is up to maybe a million Iraqis for his mistake on WMDs. Maybe he can top Bush.

            His position on Iraq is essentially Bush's. He will withdraw troops unless they are needed to defend US interests and fight terrorists.

            He repeats the right wing mantra on Social Security going broke. No regard for the actual truth. After the great Dem win on  social security he is now going to concede it without a fight.  

            I don't sense that he has any core principles. Not even respecting the right to vote. He made it to the state legislature of Illinois unopposed, because he had challenged and kicked off all the  other candidates from the ballot for technical reasons. He denied his entire district the right to vote. If it was 2000 in Florida and he was in Bush's shoes, I feel he would also have sued to stop counting the votes when he was ahead.

            I think the Dem Congress will be fighting Obama more than helping him if he is elected. I predict at least one republican house of congress at his first mid-term election.

            •  hrmmm (0+ / 0-)

              which part of "actionable intelligence" need to be explained to you? i'm guessing it's the first word ...

              it's about biconceptualism ... Obama08

              by wystler on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:14:28 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

              •  You trust Obama interprets that word same as you (0+ / 0-)

                But he certainly interprets it differently than the Pakistanis. That was the whole premise of his position.

                A statement that we do not attack sovereign nations is what I want to hear. Of course successful covert or surgical strikes are different. And they have to be successful. Heads need to roll if they aren't. That is different than large scale bombing or invasions which Obama was trying to get macho points for.

            •  So (0+ / 0-)

              Obama = Bush, or maybe even a little worse.  

              Sure, I'll believe that.  

              What else you got to sell me today.

            •  He never said he (2+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              GreatDane, ibinreno

              would bomb Pakistan. His exact quote is

              '' If we have actionable intelligence of Bin Ladens location in Pakistan and President Mussaraff refused to act on it, I would act.''

              This could mean special ops type action that goes in and captures Obama, or a predator attack or anything in between. He never specified, smartly, what action means.

              Evidently your stance is that in those circumstances , we should never pursue bin laden. I disagree and most of america would disagree with you. He should be held responsible for 9/11,imo. Call me a red-neck but I think bin laden should be pursued for authorizing an attack on americans that caused thousands of deaths...just me..guess I am a caveman.

              •  No you're not a caveman (0+ / 0-)

                And I agree that we do not take surgical strikes off the table. But I do think it is reasonable to get a feel for just how much innocent blood your President is willing to spill. We are already so far down the slippery moral slope on these issues, like torture and "pre-emptive" war, that I think we as a nation have to reassess this requirement for overt intimidation that we seem to have made a requirement for president.

          •  Both are only partially correct (0+ / 0-)

            He talked about bombing "Al Quaeda targets" (suspected?) on the border of Pakistan in more than just an effort of going after Bin Laden.

            No matter how you describe it, it will accomplish nothing save another, ultimately hollow, show of force. Plus, I don't know about you, but I am still angered if my attacker only grazes me. Also, he said this in response, partially, to accusations that he is weak on foreign policy. Poor response, IMHO.

            There is such a thing as good grief. Just ask Charlie Brown.

            by averageyoungman on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:16:38 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

        •  Excuse me, but try reading his position papers (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Yoshimi, speck tater

          You obviously don't have a clue what you're talking about.

          I want to live in the future, not in the past.

          by Involuntary Exile on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:46:54 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  How about (0+ / 0-)

            If you actually listen to what he says, his approach to governance.

            People are so blinded by the "change and hope" talk they ignore what he has written and how he approaches his mythical table. Anybody can put out position papers that say anything.

            My methodology was the same as I used in 2000, i.e., if you want to know the truth about these candidates, you have to look beyond the surface. You must look at the facts that they are not telling you. Those hidden facts paint a very consistent picture for each candidate.

            Who would make the best President by Steve Skirsch

        •  I'm probably falling for troll bait, but... (4+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          jordan, mamamedusa, speck tater, ibinreno

          Oh bloody hell.  Look at their voting records.  All three are rather close to one another in respect to left-right orientation.  HRC is lambasted hard for her war votes, Obama is blasted for what some characterize as right-appeasing rhetoric (though even this I find pretty questionable) and Edwards perceived as the farthest left of them all...even though, again, they’re all in the same small constellation.  Head over to for an interesting visual representation of all the candidates’ leanings.

          •  Troll-Bait (3+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:
            milton333, averageyoungman, Ky DEM

            No, not everything that challenges Obama is automatically troll-worthy here, current practice aside.

            I am a retired candidate diarist.

            by bink on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:51:01 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  You're completely off the mark (1+ / 0-)
              Recommended by:
              speck tater

              in your twisted misrepresentation of what Obama said about Pakistan. I know that you can do better than that.

              Obama said that if Musharraf doesn't act to take out known terrorist camps in NW Pakistan, then the US should act (using surgical strikes, eg, to take out the camps). Benazir Bhutto found what he said to be justified.

              •  If Benazir Bhutto said that (0+ / 0-)

                and it were known in Pakistan, she wouldn't have been able to get elected dog catcher.

                When are we, including Obama, going to learn that these countries aren't our personal playgrounds for military adventures? When are we, Obama included, going to learn the meaning of the term "blowback"?

                Note how popular we are at present in Pakistan due to our inclination to think and act this way.  

                •  What she said: (0+ / 0-)

                  QUESTIONER: You may have covered that, what I was going to ask you next, but let me try it anyhow.

                  We had quite an interesting, and indeed still are, mini-debate here politically between two -- initially two of the Democratic aspirants for presidents, and it spread now across party lines. And Barack Obama kicked it off by saying, "If we have actionable intelligence about high-value terrorist targets and President Musharraf won't act, we will." That's a direct quote from a recent speech of his. What is your reaction to that?

                  BHUTTO: Well, I wouldn't like the United States to violate Pakistan's sovereignty with unauthorized military operations. But the issue that I would like to stress is that Barack Obama also said, if Pakistan won't act. And that's the critical issue, that the government has to act. And the government has to act to protect Pakistan's own serenity and integrity, its own respect, and to understand that if it creates a vacuum, then others aren't going to just twiddle their thumbs while militants freely move across the border.

              •  And even more - (0+ / 0-)

                if the actionable intelligence was about about OBL specifically and Musharraf would NOT act, he would.

                "The things that unite us as a people are more powerful and enduring than anything that sets us apart" Barack Obama

                by speck tater on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:47:12 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  I want a piece (0+ / 0-)

              of that action...if Obama announces privatization of SS within a first year.. I owe you 10k.. if not then you owe me 10k.
              I know you would pass on this cus you are wrong about obama and social security and you know it.

              •  Oh (0+ / 0-)

                What counts as privatization?

                If Obama creates a package that increases SS contributions, decreases SS benefits and expands programs like 401(k) and IRA, will that count as privatization?  Because it sure would look like it to me.

                He will be under insane pressure to do this.

                Top Democrats like Sen. Kerrey from Nebraska wanted Clinton to do it.

                Think of what things will be like this time around, with a far more right-leaning Democratic caucus in the House and Senate than in the 1990s.

                A president Obama will have to intensely strong and intensely resistent to this kind of pressure in order to deflect it and maintain the ability to govern at the same time.

                I am a retired candidate diarist.

                by bink on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:21:26 AM PST

                [ Parent ]

            •  Not the challenge (0+ / 0-)

              I like it when people challenge him (and HRC and Edwards, for that matter), especially from within the party.  What made me question the potential baiting was the tone of the post.  Seemed to be filled with a bit more vitrol than I would expect is all.

              I have some reservations about Obama.  After all (although he's a bit of a nut and I don't really like him) my political leanings are far more in line with Kucinich than with any of the front runners...but I'm also a pragmatist.  

              In any case, I'd be shocked to high hell if Obama moved towards privatization of SS.

        •  Don't just look at the website... (0+ / 0-)

          Consider the history. I have a hard time believing that a guy who cut his teeth as a community organizer in Chicago's south-side will end up being an anti-progressive president.

          (Go Edwards!)

    •  You brave (naive?) soul (12+ / 0-)

      You're asking this pit of vipers to give you an objective answer on Hillary vs Obama?

      Cuckoo for Coco Puffs

      by happiness cat on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:36:06 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  One word: Iraq (8+ / 0-)

      Clinton went along with the steamroller when it mattered - Obama didn't. That's good enough for me.

      •  and seeing as this is THE (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sparhawk, HeavyJ, dotster

        most important issue to voters (see front page), and Bill AND Hillary have been screwing the pooch trying to do damage-control on her position, I'd say it's int he top three reasons people don't vote for her.

        "We don't need more heat in Washington, we need more light." -Barack Obama

        by AlyoshaKaramazov on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:41:18 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  HeavyJ: yes and no re: Obama (0+ / 0-)

        Obama gave a speech against going into Iraq, but once it happened and was popular, the material was removed from his website.

        I'd love it if somebody could go back and find out who the best anti-war advocates were and who continued to be.....and who advocates best for mitigating the misery our Iraq misadventure is causing.

        "The Science of Propaganda" and search NYPL website for "Lakoff"

        by LNK on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:55:50 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  The best anti-war advocates (0+ / 0-)

          either are not running can't be elected President. Obama is not one of those.

          As you know, only Richardson openly favors full and quick withdrawal. But he won't be elected.

          Clinton's refusal to acknowledge error on Iraq (or just flat out call Bush a liar) is fatal, at least for me.

      •  Obama didn't have a vote!!! (0+ / 0-)

        He wasn't in the Senate then. His scanty record since he's been in the Senate indicates that he would have voted the same way Hillary, Edwards, and Kerry did at the time.

        After all, going along to get along is his central theme.

        •  You may be right (0+ / 0-)

          but this is crucial: Edwards admits Iraq was a mistake. Obama SAID it was a mistake at the time.

          Clinton is still trying to figure it out. Daily. And I think it's fatal for her candidacy.

          •  But Obama will not reverse it (0+ / 0-)

            He has virtually committed to a permanent US troop presence in Iraq. Of course as he makes noise about a troop drawdown sometime in 2009-2010, he says troops will remain to protect US interests and fight terrorists. How many is anybody's guess. How does that differ from George Bush's position? You might prefer Bush's position, he says he will drawdown troops next year.

    •  "more" and "less" (6+ / 0-)

      is really a matter of degrees and nuance at this point. They are both "left". I tend to think her foreign policy would be more hawkish, and his more concilliatory, while she might tend toward more of a "traditionally Democratic" approach domestically, while he might be more willing to go outside the system (not left-right, but outside, maybe try some new things), but I don't really think he'll go out on any major limbs, policy wise--he seems too deliberate for that.

      So what people are left with is rhetoric, mostly, and the idea that if Obama is polite and civil to Republicans, or even worse, some Republicans seem to like and respect him, it's because of his views. I tend to think it's not his views at all--it's his demeanor. And if that's true, you really get the best of both worlds, unless, like some, your main concern isn't forwarding a progressive agenda or helping the nation, but simply revenge and retribution and publicly humiliating Republicans. Oh, that would be satisfying, true, but it's a poor long term strategy. If you don't believe me, look how well it's working for Republicans now...

      Is it January yet?

      by JMS on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:36:49 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  "like and respect" (3+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        Sparhawk, mmacdDE, libertyisliberal

        I'm just cynical enough to think that a lot of this "like and respect" Obama gets from Republicans is so they can wear the "See? I'm not a racist!" badge.

        •  I don't disagree with that (3+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          Sparhawk, sk4p, mayim

          and am in fact thinking that if Obama is elected, he will have done so on the back of exactly that sentiment. I'm counting on it, in fact. I haven't lost all cynicism either.

          But you say that like it's a bad thing. There is some debate, I think, about whether there's any point to being "civil" and "polite" if your feelings aren't 100% into it. Some would say ruthless and utter honesty is always necessary. But I suspect that would lead to chaos. Then again sometimes, even if you don't at first believe in something and just do it because you have to, it becomes a habit, and comfortable, and after a while you may end up believing in it afer all. So sure, some of this Obama support isn't coming from the "purest" place--but I actually see it as a step in the right direction--and if more comes from it, it's better than where we were.

          Is it January yet?

          by JMS on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:52:28 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Actually that's not true (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      pHunbalanced, soros, Hannibal

      If you look at Iowa breakdowns, you'll see that the more liberal voters went for Obama by larger margins.

      Hillary is polarizing because she and Bill have been demonized by the right wing and their media for years. They tried to portray her as a super-liberal, when the word carried an exclusively bad meaning, and it has stuck to her in the minds of less politically informed people.

      Proud Sponsor of Hope '08
      My Political (and moral) Compass: -9.00, -8.72

      by bmozaffari on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:38:20 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Let me try (6+ / 0-)

      Obama's voting record is pretty liberal. Hillary, while progressive as well, has also been a centrist in many ways and, as Edwards has been pointing out, has taken more money from lobbyists than any candidate, D or R.

      Why Republicans like Obama (although I imagine some will like him less if he wins the nomination and is forced to talk about policy in more depth) is the same reason why so many Democrats and independents like him: because despite his progressive ideals, he's also a pragmatist. And unlike Hillary, who's certainly a pragmatist herself, he makes people on the other side want to work with him. So the pragmatism is not for naught.

      I think Republicans - even those who know and hate his policy positions - genuinely like him, and believe that he can get things done. That's a good thing for America.

      President Hillary would get nothing done. She's a symbol to the right. They simply won't work with her. While she has gotten some cooperation in the Senate, forget about it as President. Gridlock.

      Democrats supporting Hillary can spin this by saying she's "tougher" than Obama because he'll cave and she won't, but that's BS. She'd be glad to cross the aisle but they simply won't let her.

      "I voted for Bush in 2000," said Kutcher. "Boy, did I get punk'd."

      by samlang on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:39:27 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  And there is a real charisma to him (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        Now, growing up in a family that lost a lot of members in the Holocaust, I am wary of charismatic leaders... but, for a charismatic leader, he's looking pretty good... I mean... that's how good his charisma is.  :)

        You can be as free as you want, so long as Republicans control birth, death, sex and marriage. And whose vote counts.

        by ultrageek on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:45:47 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  There are two types of charismatic leaders (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          One is those that embody a "feel good" theme, JFK, Reagan, and Obama.  Regardless of the policy, usually they don't really lead to mass murder or destruction.

          The second type of charisma is the one that invokes passion and anger and really gets people worked up. Nine out of ten times, this is a leader of the right or has major totalitarian implulses.  Hitler, Stalin, and George Wallace are examples, Hugo Chavez is one too.  The only liberal example of this kind of charisma that I can think of is Bobby Kennedy in 1968.

    •  Obama transcends (3+ / 0-)

      democrats, centrist, .... he's beyond all that.  It's a whole new world in American politics!  And a welcome one at that.

      Remember today the rest of your life.

    •  A few scoring outfits (8+ / 0-)

      National Journal
      PDF link:
      Obama 84.3
      Dodd 79.2
      Clinton 78.8
      Biden 76.8
      Edwards 75.7

      Americans for Democratic Action (ADA) (from 2001-2006)
      Obama 97.5
      Clinton 95.8
      Dodd 94.1
      Biden 91.6
      Edwards 82.5

      Progressive Punch (lifetime) /
      Clinton 92%
      Obama 90%
      Dodd 87%
      Biden 84%

      Let the great world spin for ever down the ringing grooves of change. - Tennyson

      by bumblebums on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:42:00 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  NAFTA (3+ / 0-)

      Welfare, Iraq, Kyl/Lieberman. citizen inclusion. Bill Clinton was the most conservative Democrat to serve in the WH in my lifetime, and I go back to FDR.

      You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war..... Albert Einstein,

      by tazz on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:45:17 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  If only we all could go back to FDR... (0+ / 0-)

        I support Barack Obama, I respect Edwards and Clinton, I will vote for the nominated Democrat.

        by nightsweat on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:17:53 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  I'll tell you one thing he would do (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          re-introduce his New Deal and totally divert the energy of America to developing a technology and economic base to clean up our planet from the foulness of petroleum and carbon emissions. It would be with the same urgency and committment as when he came up with National Industrial Recovery Act of 1933. We need whoever is the next president to find allies in Congress to push through legislation like Bob Wagner, Hugo Black and George Norris. We can also use his Civilian Conservation Corps and change the FTC to broaden new regulatory powers and provide mortgage relief to homeowners dealing with the debt mess the corporate money grubbing fat-cats left us with.

          You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war..... Albert Einstein,

          by tazz on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:39:15 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Yes Bill was a centrist, but... (0+ / 0-)

        he was actually more liberal than his record as president shows. He advocated for some pretty liberal positions in his first 2 years (healthcare, gays in military, his 1st budget) before the dems were destroyed in the 1994 midterm election. In order for him to get anything done, and get reelected, he knew he had to work with the republicans and move more toward the center. Hence the embrace of center-right positions on a balanced budget, line-item veto, and welfare reform. Clinton was a pragmatist, not an ideologue like many politicians.

        In terms of political cycles, the country was in a conservative cycle between the 80s and 2006. The republican coalition of religious conservatives, defense hawks, and business capitalists combined to elect more and more republicans to office. This coalition of groups joined with the right-wing talk radio machine to disparage liberal ideas and liberal candidates. They pushed the American people to move more in line with conservative positions, wanting to continue with some of Reagan's ideas like smaller govt, tax cuts, getting people off welfare, etc. It was during this cycle that Clinton was elected, which is one reason why his more liberal positions didn't go over well and he had to move more toward the center. It's very similar to the progressive cycle between 1932 and 1968. The American people were much more interested in liberal ideas, thus why 4 of the 5 pres's were Dems. The fifth during this time period, Eisenhower, governed as a liberal republican. So in political terms, Clinton is similar to Eisenhower, meaning they both had to govern as pragmatists in order to accomplish things during a cycle different from their ideology.

        Thank God we are moving back to a progressive cycle.

        "The only thing I would trust Dick Cheney on is if I had a dead hooker in my hotel room." -Jon Stewart

        by Chris Brock on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 02:37:06 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  from TPM (24+ / 0-)

    TPM Reader CS checks in from New Hampshire:


    When I want to pick up my ballot, I saw a lot of names in the book with "UND" crossed out and "DEM" written in its place. Anecdotally, this indicated a lot of independents breaking for the dems, probably for Obama. McCain just held a big rally here yesterday, but there was no evidence of it now.

    Just thought you might want this piece of info.

    "We don't need more heat in Washington, we need more light." -Barack Obama

    by AlyoshaKaramazov on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:29:08 AM PST

    •  this from an undeclared voter, himself. n/t (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Geotpf, tmeyer

      "We don't need more heat in Washington, we need more light." -Barack Obama

      by AlyoshaKaramazov on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:30:53 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  It's gonna be a great year to be BLUE! (5+ / 0-)

      You can be as free as you want, so long as Republicans control birth, death, sex and marriage. And whose vote counts.

      by ultrageek on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:33:12 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •   How it works in NH (13+ / 0-)

      UNDs can vote in either primary, but have to switch that party for the duration of the poll.  So you walk in, say you are UND but want to vote DEM, so they reregister you (or something) and give you a DEM ballot.  Then you have to rereregister as an UND afterwards. (At least I did last time.)

      Except I'm not going to this time.  Prediction: The ranks of the DEMs in NH grow substantially today.

      Calling Atheism a religion is like calling bald a hair color.
      What am I working on today?

      by RequestedUsername on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:36:22 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  I saw the same thing this AM n/t (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Geotpf, AlyoshaKaramazov, mamamedusa

      "Success is a level of violence where the people feel comfortable about living their daily lives." --George W Bush, May 2, 2007

      by mspicata on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:37:48 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I'm from VT, but I'm (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        itching to visit a NH ballot-place just to see for myself.

        I know................bad idea.

        "We don't need more heat in Washington, we need more light." -Barack Obama

        by AlyoshaKaramazov on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:42:56 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  Don't they have same day registration in NH? (0+ / 0-)

          Just sayin'. Not that I am encouraging any electoral shenanigans, but are you considering relocating to the Granite State?
          BTW, how is Vermont? I'm thinking I might like to move there.

          I can get a straight job, I've done it before. I never minded working hard, It's who I'm working for.-Ms. Gillian Welch

          by LeftCoastBreakdown on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:49:55 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

          •  I work in NH (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            Not thinking of moving here though.  House prices and rent WAY too high, because the only tax there is property tax.

            Vermont is great.  Moved here 10 years ago.  Caveat:  If you're  a shy type person, it may take a while to "find your place" here.  But, Vermonters not only accept people as they are, they seem to EXPECT people to be that way.  So, since I'm shy, they pretty much leave me be.

            Schools are great.  Economy is good.  Plenty of great outdoor sporting possibilities.  LOTS of snow.  But it's gorgeous in the winter here.  Gorgeous all year except for the "fifth season" which is "mud season"  Much of April.

            Burlington and Montpelier are great for entertainment, college, etc.  It has a great "alternative lifestyle" sector there.  Hippy towns galore.  Conservative towns galore.

            All kids are covered for healthcare through age 17.  It's called "Dr. Dinosaur".  And it's where Dean got his start.

            Canada is nearby, as is Boston and upstate New York.  Flying in and out of VT is pricey though.  Better to travel by air out of Manchester, NH.

            I grew up in Cleveland OH, but now VT feels like home.  I even dress VT now.  Layers, baby, LAYERS!!!!

            "We don't need more heat in Washington, we need more light." -Barack Obama

            by AlyoshaKaramazov on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:07:29 AM PST

            [ Parent ]

            •  Thanks for the heads up! (0+ / 0-)

              I've checked out Burlington a bit. I really like the politics in Vermont, and it seems like the kind of place you might meet some smart, interesting people.
              And civil unions! Yeah!

              I can get a straight job, I've done it before. I never minded working hard, It's who I'm working for.-Ms. Gillian Welch

              by LeftCoastBreakdown on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:36:33 AM PST

              [ Parent ]

  •  My only hope,,, (20+ / 0-)

    is that Edwards takes second place.

    Don't care about the numbers.  

    As far as the GOP, I'd love to see Romney take it.  McCain and the preacher need to be knocked out of this thing.

    "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine 3900+ dead Americans. Bring them home.

    by Miss Blue on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:30:02 AM PST

  •  Michigan GOP primary should be a hoot (7+ / 0-)

    If Willard Romney doesn't win tonight, he faces the proverbial must-win situation here. And he'll be facing two unknowns: the under-the-radar network of church-based Huckabee supporters, and Democrats who decide raid the GOP primary because Edwards and Obama took their names off the ballot.

    The weather here is perfect for Willard: unseasonably warm and wet. He'll find an ample supply of mud to fling at his opponents.

    "What if we could have an election that was not a referendum on either the Clinton or Bush presidencies?"--Frank Rich.

    by Dump Terry McAuliffe on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:30:20 AM PST

  •  Repug clusterfucks are HOT... (4+ / 0-)

    You sure know how to get the kinky side of me going.

    Here's hoping Romney cleans McZzzzzz's clock today!

  •  I like those democratic numbers (6+ / 0-)

    but I think it will be closer than that.

    Obama 39%

    Clinton 30%

    Edwards 25%

  •  If Ron Paul triples Rudy again (5+ / 0-)

    ...then my prediction is cold beer and warm cookies.

    Oh, the hills are groaning with excess, like a table ceaselessly being set.

    by faithfull on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:30:45 AM PST

  •  Good guessing, Markos. (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    libertyisliberal, Mardish

    And your incredible Luckaccuracy in guessing Iowa definitely qualifies you to make this estimate.

    I must say I think Romney is dunner than Hillary, though we shall see.

    Obama    39
    Clinton  30
    Edwards  29


    McCain    38
    Huckabee  26
    Romney    22
    Thompson  12
    Paul      10
    Rudy       9

  •  Save us, Chariman Newt! (6+ / 0-)
    And who for his veep?  What the hell, let's say Joe Lieberman, for geographical and humorous balance.
  •  O 41, C 33, E 20 - so say we all (n/t) (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Geotpf, mcfly, serrano, Mardish
  •  Kos! Go for it! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I love your predictions, and I hope they prove you right!

    "A republic, if you can keep it." Benjamin Franklin

    by herodotus on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:31:23 AM PST

    •  This Horse Race Stuff Is Annoying From Kos... (0+ / 0-)

      I can't stand the horse race stuff from Kos... it's feels like Chris Matthews type stuff... a waste of time, like guessing the Cowboys-Giants score... especially when he admits that he pulls the numbers out of his arse...


      "Don't look back... something might be gaining on you..." -Satchel Paige.

      by npb7768 on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 10:24:04 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Put a fork in Clinton (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    if your predictions are true.

    And Saint McCain too, actually (from your keyboard to God's ear).

    •  Hillary (6+ / 0-)

      Too many people are claiming that Hillary is done if she doesn't win NH. I think that's crazy talk. She has too much money and most of the Democratic establishment behind her. She's going to hang on until after the super primary day regardless of how she does between now and then. I expect her to win a considerable number of states on the big primary day. Hillary isn't "done" by any stretch of the imagination despite what the talking heads on TV would want us all to believe.
      No, I'm not a Hillary supporter. I like Dodd, Edwards and Obama (in that order). I just think too many people are writing her off prematurely.

      Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.

      by cybersaur on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:41:14 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Bill Lost The First 5 States Or So... (0+ / 0-)

      Bill Clinton in '92 didn't win until Georgia, which was like the fifth or seventh primary (he lost Iowa, NH, Maine, Nevada, Colorado, etc).   A NH loss wouldn't destroy HRC, especially with the Clinton machine in place.


      "Don't look back... something might be gaining on you..." -Satchel Paige.

      by npb7768 on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 10:21:33 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Bill Clinton didn't have an opponent (0+ / 0-)

        like Obama.  Had Mario Cuomo entered the race, Clinton would have been a footnote in history.

      •  1992 campaign was much more spread out... (0+ / 0-)

        than the calendar is today. There were weeks between primaries back then, not days like now. But you are right about Clinton not winning until later on. That was how most primary campaigns worked years ago, building up and getting a candidate named the winner not until mid to late summer. Now with the media and frontloaded schedule, we will have a winner named by March. Here is how 92 went:

        "The only thing I would trust Dick Cheney on is if I had a dead hooker in my hotel room." -Jon Stewart

        by Chris Brock on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 02:49:19 PM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  McCain takes from Edwards (5+ / 0-)

    North of Concord anyway.

    What I think
    Obama 45%
    Edwards 25%
    Clinton 24%
    Other 6%

    What I want
    Edwards 45%
    Obama 30%
    Clinton 25%

    Republicans w/o %

    bush/clinton/clinton/bush/bush let's turn the record over

    by SMucci on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:31:38 AM PST

  •  I actually think you're right... except... (0+ / 0-)

    I think Thompson comes ahead of Guiliani, who is ahead of Duncan.


    Your percentages look spookily accurate.

    You can be as free as you want, so long as Republicans control birth, death, sex and marriage. And whose vote counts.

    by ultrageek on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:31:45 AM PST

  •  Edwards should break 20% (5+ / 0-)

    Clinton will not break 30%

    Here's hoping.

    I will make them have it. I will stuff their mouths with Gold!--Aneurin Bevan (on the NHS)

    by Salo on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:31:48 AM PST

  •  If you started to get (5+ / 0-)

    how Republicans think, we would be very worried

  •  I think Kos is as good as Zogby (6+ / 0-)

    McCain - 35
    Romney - 33
    Huckabee - 22 + God on his side
    Giuliani - 9-11

  •  Newt! (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SMucci, Geotpf, Miss Blue, ShadowSD, markom

    The AP has a silly piece about Romney "getting his groove back" even if he "comes in second" (loses) NH.

    One can only hope Romney is the nominee. Nationally, he's roadkill waiting to happen.

    Also, if Clinton finishes that badly, she should bow out. An Obama v Edwards campaign would be something worth seeing.

    •  Hillary (3+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Geotpf, milton333, libertyisliberal

      Hillary won't bow out. They still have an extraordinary organization in the major states and lots of cash. In fact if she loses this and SC it only makes it a close national contest between Obama and Clinton.

      This is far from over. The media will begin to heavily scrutinize Obama like he has not been scrutinized before ow the HE is the front runner. Most of that will be fueled by the Clinton character aassination team and the media outlets that support them.

      On the GOP side, Romney is has lost his mojo. Once you get through early February I believe it will be contest between McCain and Rudy.

      •  I disagree (0+ / 0-)

        Clinton would be very, very unwise to fight this out after losing SC:

        1. The base is not motivated for her and does not trust her
        1. The media DESPISES her
        1. The Clinton "character assassination" team appears to be completely inept (Bob Kerrey? Mark Penn?)
        1. Most importantly, Obama clobbered her among women voters in IA, and he can do it again elsewhere. Without them, where does her strongest support come from?
        •  Absolutely, but (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Wow. I do agree with every one of your points.

          But there is one factor and that is the Clinton hubris. Did you hear Bill speaking about characterizing Obama as a fairy tale? They truly believe this is their destiny.

          I also believe both Clinton events were staged yesterday (tears and protestor). How did that protestor get up front with all the security surrounding Hillary? And she was not a very good actor because she was not in the least rattled when he got up with "Iron My Shirt" and seemed to have a prepared response.

          •  Yes Clinton Hubris (1+ / 0-)
            Recommended by:

            fuels Hill and Bill and will keep them in the race (it's a two-fer, remember). Their hubris has no bounds -- and as Edwards said, their campaign has no conscience.  What delights me is how their campaign is not as smart as they think they are.

            Hillary wants payback for years of public humiliation by Bill's affairs.  She has a delusional sense of herself as a leader.

            She is a follower par excellence.  No vision.  No courage.  Just a desire to beat the charismatic guy and prove herself worthy of the love she's never gotten from her spouse.  Sad that personal demons got the better of her a long time ago...

            •  Perfectly said (0+ / 0-)

              And it does not appear to be over. Based on news reports Clinton is bringing back the dynamic duo of Carville and Begala. So let the dirt begin. If Obama or Edwards did the slightest thing wrong (from Kindergarten on up) we will know about it.

              This could benefit Edwards. Obama clearly does not have the experience of any prior Presidential candidate from either party. And he has used that to his benefit. But I will bet that his short legacy will be pulled apart and reported to show him as a too inexperienced person.

              Many are reading into Obama what we want to (or hope to). With the campaign that Carville and Begala conduct I can see where the lustre may wear off on Obama to some degree (or more). But I don't think Hillary will reap those benefits. I think it will be Edwards.

        •  I disagree (0+ / 0-)

          Mark Penn will be shoved aside and you'll see the Ragin' Cajun again. He never met a negative attack he didn't like. She'll go after the Super Delegates if she falls flat in the primaries. As long as she can prevent Obama from getting 2000 delegates, she'll stay in till the end. If she does, the '68 Chicago convention will seem like a walk in the park. I think Edwards is going to be a key factor in determining what Clinton does from now until the end of the primaries.

          You cannot simultaneously prevent and prepare for war..... Albert Einstein,

          by tazz on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:48:33 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Romney DID win Wyoming (0+ / 0-)

      Not that anybody noticed.  But one win and two second places (assuming McCain beats him as expected in NH) should mean he's the front runner, since two different canidates beat him the two times he lost.  Of course, it doesn't, mainly due to high early expectations considering how much of his own dough he plowed into TV ads in the two states.

  •  On the Republican side, they're all losers! (5+ / 0-)

    Regardless of who wins.

    You'd be paranoid, too, if everybody was out to get you.

    by Ballard Mutt on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:32:21 AM PST

  •  Fred at 3 Rudy at 4% ? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    soros, mayim

    Do you think they will be that low?  And Ron paul is at 12%!

    The race for the bottom may be more interesting than the race for 1st

    "The only person sure of himself is the man who wishes to leave things as they are, and he dreams of an impossibility" -George M. Wrong.

    by statsone on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:32:23 AM PST

    •  I do, yes. (0+ / 0-)

      Granpa and the Playa have thrown in the towel on NH.

      Paul has a very active (though small) cadre.

      Huckster got some mileage from Iowa and there are some evangelicals in NH (not as many as IA but some).

      It'll be interesting to see if Paul beats Huckster for 3rd.

      Enterpriser; Hard core Libertarian: +6.63 / -4.41

      by jimsaco on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 11:09:36 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  I think more Indies will vote in the GOP race (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SneakySnu, markom

    in NH, more than what Kos predicts.... there are strong opinions on the Romney/McCain thing, up in that state.  

    My predictions:

    Obama wins the D primary by a 10-12 point margin;

    McCain wins the R primary by a 6-8 point margin.  

  •  Yankee Fans (7+ / 0-)

    I heard on the radio that Giuliani brought in volunteers from New York who were wearing NY Yankee hats. Another bad communication situation.

  •  Predict: (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    RichM, Mardish

    O 38 C 30 E 22.  Is Hillary finished after this, or is there ANY hope on Feb 5th, i just don't know...

    Repugs? No Idea, though i see McCain with a slight win.

  •  You know Nostrodamus... (0+ / 0-)

    ...was smart enough to stay out of the political prediction business- and look how well it worked out for him?

    Fire away, the worse that could happen is to be wrong; heaven forbid we fail to be omniscient and reveal ourselves as regular fallable human beings.

  •  My prediction (9+ / 0-)

    Hillary has multiple unforced errors the day before the election
    Edwards criticizes her for crying  (?!?!)
    Obama on a tidal wave of popularity (even the Unity candidates are bummed!!)

    Obama - 39
    Edwards - 26
    Hillary - 24

    "We don't need more heat in Washington, we need more light." -Barack Obama

    by AlyoshaKaramazov on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:32:49 AM PST

  •  re:You Misspelled (0+ / 0-)

    one of the Republican names.  It's Thomspon.

  •  Romney is toast (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    wonderful world, mayim

    Now that other viable Republican candidates have emerged, people have finally started calling the emperor out on his nakedness.  Romney is a sleazeball flipflopper of record proportion, and the conservative media were only politely declining to mention this because they were afraid he was the best they were going to come up with.  Now that they know that the Huckabee crowd just won't vote for Romney, period, they have no incentive to try to prop him up.  They've realized they're better served by throwing their weight behind McCain... he may be crazy, but he's got a better chance with the Huckabee crowed than Romney ever will.  

    I'm predicting Romney comes in with sub-20 numbers.  

  •  I can dream (10+ / 0-)

    Obama 42
    Edwards 27
    Clinton 26

    (Im an Obama supporter)

    Oh, the hills are groaning with excess, like a table ceaselessly being set.

    by faithfull on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:33:16 AM PST

    •  that's close to my prediction (0+ / 0-)

      and I don't think it's a dream.

      Hillary has been dropping an average of about six points PER DAY.  True, Obama is picking up most of her votes, but Edwards is trickling up the ladder too.

      I truly think he can pull off a one or two percent upset for second place.

      "We don't need more heat in Washington, we need more light." -Barack Obama

      by AlyoshaKaramazov on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:47:56 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  I truly hope so! (0+ / 0-)

        I hope Edwards continues to beat Clinton for 2nd place.  Taking her down is key.

        I am an Edwards-Obama supporter and would love to see them both in the WH.  I don't care if it's Obama/Edwards or Edwards/Obama.  

        Clinton is not a leader, she's a follower.  Her BS rhetoric about being "your champion" is pathetic when one looks at what she has NOT done in the Senate during her 2 terms.  And her "experience" meme can be shot down too.  She has less time in elected office than Obama and the so-called difference in her experience rests on 8 years as First Lady only, where she accomplished very little as a power behind the scenes.

        Her performance (manufactured "tears" without tears) yesterday was completely transparent to anyone with acting training or experience.  Tell-tale physical and vocal giveaways and a poor job of acting -- but pundits lapped it up.  I found her words "I've had so many opportunities from America, and I don't want to see us fall back..." to be quite the Freudian slip.  Subtext: It's my turn and I see it slipping away. She is the epitome of a "me, me, me" candidate and the more she speaks, the more it's apparent to those who read her.

    •  It's not that crazy (0+ / 0-)

      It's considered somewhat unlikely, but there is a very cogent theory behind how it could happen, and it has precedent in Iowa: fleeing Clinton supporters and undecideds split 2/3 for Obama and 1/3 for Edwards.  Therefore, the finish you're suggesting is more than plausible, and I have to admit that I've been thinking along the same lines. I'd certainly be happy to see those numbers!

      Do we really want Rudy, Romney, or Huckabee to be able to turn to our nominee in 2008 and say "you voted for this war and I didn't"? Think about it.

      by ShadowSD on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:58:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Here goes nuttin' (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I think Obama will win, but not by as drastic a margin as has been predicted by Kos or some of my friends.


    Obama 40%
    Clinton 28%
    Edwards 24%

    And McCain will keep a fair chunk of indies while being a comfort figure for his old GOP supporters.


    McCain 34%
    Romney 27%
    Huckabee 12%
    Paul 11%
    Giuliani 10%

    •  And for a freaky surprise (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      nevsky42, Sparhawk

      I'll take Ron Paul breaking 15% and shocking everyone but his insane supporters. I think he'll be more liekly in the 11-12% range, but he may be a big surprise what with the strong libertarian streak in NH.

    •  12% "not drastic"? (0+ / 0-)

      Obviously a 12-point win isn't as thunderous as the one Kos (like a few others) is forecasting, but still--it's a beating. This Obama supporter will take it.

      The thing I worry about (given that a loss seems entirely impossible) is Obama winning by 3-5. The Clinton campaign will paint that as the greatest comeback that's ever been comebacked. Guh.

      Anyone want to debate the number that's the dividing line between "This is the Obama lead we suspected" and a (non-insane) chorus of "Hillary's on the comeback"? I'm thinking 8% or so.

  •  I'd predict embarrassment for Republicans, (5+ / 0-)

    but that would require that they have some shame.

    The President is telling everyone he was provided with faulty intelligence. Yeah, well, DNA is a bitch. -- Will Durst.

    by ajbrown on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:33:31 AM PST

  •  Julie Annie math (8+ / 0-)

    9 + 11 = 4%

    "Constitutional Crisis Forthcoming"

    by egarratt on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:33:43 AM PST

  •  If these predictions play out (0+ / 0-)

    Is the Democratic nomination wrapped up, or do Clinton and Edwards have an edge somewhere that might allow them to come back?

    Visit Sinister, the home of a left-handed left-wing Okie Jew.

    by ethanthej on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:33:49 AM PST

    •  Clinton will be in until Feb 5th (3+ / 0-)

      and I say that as an Obama supporter. He could win in NH by 50 points, but I think Clinton will keep running through Feb 5th. She has some strengths there. NY is a given, and so is NJ probably. She is strong in CA and AR as well. So, no matter what happens today, I think the nomination still goes on.

      They said this day would never come - Barack Obama

      by jj32 on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:41:52 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Any prediction on turnout? (6+ / 0-)

    I think the most amazing thing about Iowa was not the percentages, but the sheer volume of people that turned out for our top three candidates.  That warmed my frozen heart.  I predict that Obama wins and that democratic votes exceed 2004 by 25% (with that number coming from new voters and more independants voting in the dem primary over the republican primary)

    "The woman's life is misery; for God's sake, people, at least give her a few good songs". NYT review of The Color Purple

    by arogue7 on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:33:56 AM PST

  •  What's pissing me off (11+ / 0-)

    is that if Obama wins by a wide margin, than everybody will spin this as "the campaign is over".

    And, alas, for all intents and purposes, they'll be right.

    Which pisses me off that once again, I have no say in selecting my nominee.  Don't get me wrong, I don't live in Kos' anti-IA/NH ghetto per se, I like the idea that "retail politics" gives a wider range of candidates a potential chance to sell themselves as viable presidential candidates.

    But, the lock these two states have, plus the moronically early caucus/primary dates this year means the system is broken.

    There are lots of good ideas out there on how to fix em, many involve an element of "retail politics" while potentially moving the locations around.

    The Deleware Plan, the America Plan, whatever.  Something's gotta give.

    "I'm not writing to make conservatives happy. I want them to hate my opinions. I'm not interested in debating them. I want to stop them." - Steve Gilliard

    by grog on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:34:06 AM PST

    •  It's kinda a petard hoist... (4+ / 0-)

      I with you on how silly it is that two medium states can decide the fate of the country.  They aren't all that representative (Ohio would be a better choice, election fraud aside, IMHO).  But we must remember, Terry McCullif (sp) front-loaded the primary for a Hilary win.  And it has blown-up in their faces.

      •  ? (0+ / 0-)

        Iowa and NH always go first.  Not everything in life is Hillary's fault.  The other states trying to crowd in for an early primary still won't get a say, is what grog is saying, because everyone's getting ready to call this after 2 small states have voted.

        Thought is only a flash in the middle of a long night, but the flash that means everything - Henri Poincaré

        by milton333 on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:09:10 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  There are no "good guys" in this (1+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:

          Yes, part of the impetus behind rushing up the calendar was Clinton derived.

          But, lots of Dem party bosses in states all over the place had gotten fed up with the current system and given the lack of firm rules, they rushed into the vacuum, hence, here we are.

          The primary system needs overhaul.

          "I'm not writing to make conservatives happy. I want them to hate my opinions. I'm not interested in debating them. I want to stop them." - Steve Gilliard

          by grog on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:34:45 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

    •  Primaries (4+ / 0-)

      Our Texas primary isn't until March something so I doubt I'll have any say in selecting the Dem candidate at all, but on the other hand, it's probably a good thing Texans won't have any input in deciding who the candidates are...

      Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.

      by cybersaur on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:49:42 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Texas (0+ / 0-)

        With due respect, Texas is the most corrupt, messed-up place I've ever been.  And I lived in Saudi Arabia.  I just cannot wrap my head around some of the stuff that goes on there, from the politics, to the banks participating in fraud with drug runners, to the mania for executing retarded people, and on and on.  It's just a really freakish state.

        Thought is only a flash in the middle of a long night, but the flash that means everything - Henri Poincaré

        by milton333 on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:11:35 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  From the perspective of NC (0+ / 0-)

        that's an early primary!  Ours isn't until May 6th.  The sad thing is that NC is starting to trend blue.  

        End the Cuban Travel Ban and Embargo Now!

        by SneakySnu on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:18:12 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  March would be an improvement for me.... (0+ / 0-)

        I can just about hold my breath from PA's primary until the convention and not turn darker than baby blue................

      •  Indiana's Primary isn't until May. We are out! (0+ / 0-)
  •  hoping against hope (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    IhateBush, Miss Blue

    for some Mittmentum - both to see the weakest foe win and to make the press sob over their boy, St. McCain.

    Or not, I'm sure McCain will be "a hero" and "comeback kid" even with a weak 2nd-place.

    "People hate Bush and hate this war. It's that simple, and it's been true for quite some time" - Atrios

    by atrexler on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:34:16 AM PST

    •  could happen, obama is mccains worst nightmare (2+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      atrexler, drmah

      and if he is then Mittens will benefit.  I'm still thinking that Muttney will pull off a victory by 1 or 2 points.

      It all makes sense after the shrooms and the purple haze!

      by soros on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:51:24 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Obama is the GOP's worst nightmare (0+ / 0-)

        We all know how the GOP could get the base out against Obama, but they can't do that because it would require a racist appeal that will turn off suburban Republicans and independents.

        They may remind us that Obama is a commie, too, but the Democrats are right on all the issues.  That won't play either.

        Of course, I have been an Obama supporter for awhile now.

        Wer kämpft, kann verlieren. Wer nicht kämpft, hat schon verloren. Bertolt Brecht

        by MoDem on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:15:29 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  Here's what Obama.... (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Kevvboy, aimeeinkc, Clem Yeobright

    must do now that he's won Iowa and could win New Hampshire. He needs to assume leadership regarding New Orleans and Gulf Region recovery.

    This is an urgent issue that needs to be front-paged because it has not been getting the media attention that it should. The life of a 300-year-old city and of her people depends on it.

    Please read, and rec',  What Obama Must Do Now. It's rapidly slipping off the front page.

    "We are all New Orleans now."--Barbara O'Brien

    by Louisiana 1976 on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:34:20 AM PST

  •  Note that the Rs have a slew of Winner-Take-All (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    milton333, Involuntary Exile
    - on a statewide basis! - primaries coming up on 5 Feb, including New York and New Jersey.  

    That tends to sober the candidate's mind ...

    Look what it did for McGovern in 1972!

    You kids behave or I'm turning this universe around RIGHT NOW! - god

    by Clem Yeobright on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:34:22 AM PST

  •  Go Romney! (9+ / 0-)

    Ick, I feel dirty just for typing that, but he really needs to stay in the race for the long haul. Mittens just can't drop out before the writers' strike is over, please, merciful deity.

    For the Dems, I predict Obama 39, Clinton 30, Edwards 28%, Richardson 2, Kucinich 0.5%.

    "People who speak in metaphors should shampoo my crotch." ~- Jack Nicholson

    by MBNYC on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:34:25 AM PST

  •  Edwards is (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Predictor, VA Breeze

    in it to the Convention.  It is far from over.

    What if it's a two-man Democratic race?

    New Hampshire may leave Clinton on the ropes, reshaping the contest

    HAMPTON, N.H. - Imagine a whole new race for the Democratic presidential nomination: a two-man contest between the 2004 vice presidential nominee, John Edwards, and the rookie phenomenon of 2008, Sen. Barack Obama.

    If Hillary Clinton were to suffer a defeat of large proportions on Tuesday night in the New Hampshire primary, and if her star were to fade in the succeeding contests in Nevada and South Carolina, she might either quit the race or cease to be a dominant factor.

    Edwards would remain as the only person standing between Obama and the Democratic presidential nomination.


    "On Wednesday morning, people will wake up and say, ‘Jeez, this guy (Obama) is going to be our nominee,’" Trippi said. At that point, Trippi said, a closer examination will occur: "The world is going to say, who the hell is this guy?"

    msnbc: Tim Curry

    "They're going to give their power away when we take their power away." John Edwards

    by TomP on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:35:05 AM PST

    •  Trippi is deluding himself and Edwards (6+ / 0-)

      This whole get Hillary out and Edwards strategy is  frankly stupid. If Hillary gets out, majority of her voters will go to Obama especially in South.  

      •  Edwards won't be a serious candidate (4+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:
        jimsaco, Geotpf, milton333, AJsMom

         ...after New Hampshire.  Obama is picking up even more strength from seceding Edwards supporters than he is from Clinton supporters.  He'll struggle on, in an increasingly futile and pointless manner, until February 5, where he will be officially "done" (even if he doesn't release his delegates until the convention and remains on the ballot).  I predict he doesn't win a single state, not even North Carolina.

          I'm not saying "stick a fork in him, he's done" at this point; but I am saying, "flip him over and grill him a bit on the other side."

        •  I always enjoy (2+ / 0-)
          Recommended by:
          humphrey, Predictor

          the graciousness of Obama supporters.

          Guess what.  We believe deeply that real change is needed in America. You can taunt and play schoolyard games, but we will never stop fighting.

          And if Edwards does not prevail, there will be another race, another candidate.  There are alwys activist struggles every day.  

          These issues will not go away and Obama simply lacks the will to take on the powers that are.  Furthermore, he is comfortable within class stratification.  He would tinker a bit, certainly be far better than Bush, but economic injustice will continue.

          As Teddy Kennedy said in 1980:  

          For all those whose cares have been our concern, the work goes on, the cause endures, the hope still lives, and the dream shall never die.

          This is what we fight for.  So you can taunt and act like this is a football game, but it is a matter of life and death to many:


          Even though millions of people come into contact with Cintas' services every day, few people know about the poverty wages, back-breaking workloads and unsafe conditions that Cintas employees endure. LEARN MORE >

          Cintas workers are standing with UNITE HERE and the Teamsters to change these conditions and make our jobs better.

          Did Eleazar Torres-Gomez Lose his Life for Company Profits?

          "Federal safety officials have called for a $2.78 million penalty against the Cintas Corporation, the nation’s largest supplier of uniforms, for violations at its Tulsa plant, where a worker died when he was pulled into a large dryer."

          Eleazar Torres-Gomez was pronounced dead on the scene after apparently being dragged by a conveyor into an industrial dryer.  Torres-Gomez was trapped in the dryer--which can reportedly reach temperatures of 300 degrees--for at least 20 minutes.

          Federal safety officials have called for a $2.78 million penalty against the Cintas Corporation, the nation's largest supplier of uniforms, for violations at its Tulsa plant, where a worker died when he was pulled into a large dryer.

          Representative Phil Hare, Democrat of Illinois, said yesterday, "OSHA's findings prove that Cintas inaction led to the death of Mr. Torres Gomez despite the company's ridiculous allegations that he tried to commit suicide or was too stupid to operate the machinery."

          Links to all diaries and cites

          "They're going to give their power away when we take their power away." John Edwards

          by TomP on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:03:14 AM PST

          [ Parent ]

      •  Thanks for your comment. (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        And how many national campaigns have you run for president?

        "They're going to give their power away when we take their power away." John Edwards

        by TomP on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:52:01 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

        •  No need to run a national campaign (0+ / 0-)

          Come on, one does not need to run a national campaign to see that this strategy is not going to work. In the Saturday debate,
          when Edwards decided that he will not support Hillary but support Obama was the point that he basically ceded the election to Obama.

          His whole point was that he and Obama were candidates of change. First of all, a common person
          would have hard time digesting a FORMER VP candidate as a candidate of change (ditto for
          a former first lady). Secondly in this election,
          CHANGE is a codeword for Obama. By endorsing CHANGE,
          he endorsed Obama for all practical purposes.

          Yes, I know his kind of change is the ``real'' change, but try to explain his ``real'' change
          from the ``cosmetic'' change of Obama is in my opinion a fruitless errand-something fit for an
          intellectual  discussion but try explaing it to the guy/gal who wants to have a beer with the President.
          Now, I dont know many people who can handle both
          a few beers and a deep intellectual discussion, and be sober enough to vote the next day!

      •  It's his best play (0+ / 0-)

        Edwards needs a two-person race. Obama has momentum right now and there's no way Edwards can stop him anytime soon (short of Obama doing something really stupid, of course).

        So who does that leave? - Hillary. It's a longish shot, but if Edwards can accelerate Obama a bit to steal Clinton's support and attack Clinton to take her out, he stands the chance of making her irrelevant and becoming the not-Obama candidate.  Of course then he has to hope Obama flames out somehow so he can sweep in with a come-from-behind victory.

        I don't think it will work, but after not winning Iowa outright, it's the best strategy for him right now.

        I support Barack Obama, I respect Edwards and Clinton, I will vote for the nominated Democrat.

        by nightsweat on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:52:28 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

      •  I agree (0+ / 0-)

        they think too hard sometimes.

        Edwards should his own thing and be a little more gentlemanly about Hillary. I was annoyed he stepped in the way of her questioning Obama during the NH debate.

        and Edwards is my guy.

  •  Here's my shot in the dark... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    DH from MD, Mardish

    Obama     41
    Clinton   29
    Edwards   24

    McCain    34
    Romney    32
    Huckabee  18
    Paul      10
    Giulaini   4
    Thompson   1

    I can't see McCain loosing.  But I do think most Independents will break for Bary.  The media will be in orgasm tonight.

  •  C = 30; E = 31; O = 37 on the Democratic side ... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    libertyisliberal, Mardish

    ... and M = 36; R = 27; and H = 19 on the Rethuglican side.

    Call me a pessimist but I really don't see Clinton losing by double-digit margins. Right now Obama is getting a big bounce from Iowa but that doesn't mean everyone interested in him will actually vote for him. Also, I expect a lot of independents in NH will break for the Rethuglican primary to help McCain beat Romney. After all, it's his turn and he's just about the only adult, serious candidate they have.

    Time will tell. I hope that Kos is right and I am wrong.

  •  THE Maths® (6+ / 0-)

    Obama     42
    Clinton   29
    Edwards   18
    Richardson 8
    Kucinich   3

    McCain    35
    Romney    28
    Huckabee  15
    Paul      12
    Thompson   6
    Giulaini   4

    I support Barack Obama, I respect Edwards and Clinton, I will vote for the nominated Democrat.

    by nightsweat on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:35:29 AM PST

  •  Closer than folks think (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    milton333, jj32, Mardish

    O - 35
    C - 32
    E - 26


    Mitt. - 35
    McCain - 30

  •  My crystal ball says... (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mcfly, Mardish

    Obama - 41%
    Clinton - 29%
    Edwards - 24%
    Richardson - 3%

    An avidity to punish is always dangerous to liberty. It leads men to stretch, to misinterpret, and to misapply even the best of laws. -- T. Paine (-6.25, -7.18)

    by DH from MD on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:35:36 AM PST

  •  Prediction (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    SneakySnu, jj32, Mardish

    Obama 38
    Clinton 31
    Edwards 20
    Richardson 4

    McCain 32
    Romney 31
    Huckabee 16
    Paul 10
    Thompson 5
    Giuliani 4

  •  Non-evangelicals won't vote for Huckabee (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Mormons? Catholics? Huck cannot forge that coalition and remain true to the tenets of his theology.

    Anti-Catholicism is rampant and all we need do is ask Huckabee: "Can Catholics can be saved?"

    And if Huckabee is Veep nominee for McCain, the obvious tag line is "Only a heartbeat away."

    If Huckabee gets 40% if the delegates needed for the nomination (and is in first place) it will be a bloodbath in Minneapolis.

    = = =

    Hey, any news on the Larry Craig business?

    We got 230,000 voters, they got 115,000. Iowa was a HUGE HUGE WIN for all of us.

    by Bill White on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:36:02 AM PST

    •  Don't be so sure. (0+ / 0-)

      40% of Huckabee's vote in Iowa came from non-evangelicals.  He's got the populist thing going for him.  He's engaging.  People like him.  IMO, that makes him scary as hell.

      I want to live in the future, not in the past.

      by Involuntary Exile on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:27:01 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

    •  Bloodbath where? (0+ / 0-)

      The Republican convention will be in St. Paul, Minnesota, thanks.

      Given that I work all of six blocks from the Xcel Center (where it all will go down), I'm half-dreading what a brokered Republican convention will mean. There are already enough lefty groups threatening to shut the city down ("to end the war"--nice thought, I guess) and local authorities terrified of losing order. If we add extremely pissed right-wing activists (Huck fans, perhaps) to that mix, I worry how ugly this could get...

  •  I'm in NH (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    mmacdDE, Mardish

    and I posted this yesterday:

    My current GOP prediction:  Romney, 32%; McCain, 31%; Paul, 13%; Huckabee, 13%; Giuliani, 8%; Thompson -- ah, who cares?

    I think you're pretty much on the money, Kos, on the GOP side.  The more important thing to watch for here is turnout.  Again, from my comment of yore:

    The other interesting stat to watch for is how many voters opt for the Democratic primary.  If it's more than 40% of the total electorate in the state, then the GOP is doomed -- DOOMED! -- come fall.

    I'm SO looking forward to the post-mortems on the dark side tomorrow.

    "Success is a level of violence where the people feel comfortable about living their daily lives." --George W Bush, May 2, 2007

    by mspicata on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:36:27 AM PST

  •  A 19 point Obama win??? (4+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pHunbalanced, mcfly, jj32, Mardish

    Setting expectations awfully high there.  Obama clearly has the momentum, but I just don't see him peeling back that much of Hillary's support.  My prediction:

    Obama     40
    Clinton   30
    Edwards   21

  •  BO - 41, HC - 25, JE - 20 (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    chicago minx, Mardish

    That's my prediction

    On the GOP side:

    McCain 30, Romney 29, Huck 15, Paul 10

  •  O (38), C (30), E (25) (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pHunbalanced, mcfly, Mardish

    Obama     38
    Clinton   30
    Edwards   25
    Richardson 5
    Kucinich   2

    Romney    30
    McCain    30
    Huckabee  15
    Paul       8
    Giulliani  9
    Thompson   8

  •  This is the Kos of Death (9+ / 0-)

    Obama will now be lucky to eek out a win!

    I got tased in The Great Markos Candidate Meltdown Cranky Pants Sting of Ought 7

    by Walt starr on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:37:09 AM PST

  •  Good call! (0+ / 0-)

    Good call, Markos! And I think you nailed it, on Obama's big victory and on Romney's sneaker win.

  •  I dont like making predictions, but I think (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    if McCain loses NH by even a point as you say, he wont win the nomination. For all the talk of him rebounding in the polls, it's only really happened in NH. I suppose he could try and make a comeback in MI, but still.

    They said this day would never come - Barack Obama

    by jj32 on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:37:50 AM PST

  •  Great if Republicans needed recounts and stuff (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    libertyisliberal, drmah, crystalboy

    That would be funny. No one conceding.

  •  I think the viral CW in NH,,, (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cixelsyd, jj32, mamamedusa now that "this is not the McCain we voted for in 2000."  Which is correct.  And which accrues bigtime to Obama.  So I agree with your predictions by and large.

  •  Kos, you are such a funny man (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    No, I mean that. I just read your stuff and chuckled all the way through it.

    I agree with you about the Indie vote in NH. If people decide to go with their gut, they'll move to Obama, and his win could be huge. Not sure if I'd go to a 19-point victory over Clinton, but 15 points is not unreasonable. I do not see Edwards gaining much traction, even though he really tried to wedge himself back into it. We'll see.

    As far as the GOP, I, too am hoping for a brokered convention, one that drags out and gets ugly and ends up with a weakened party and a weakened ticket whose dirty laundry has stunk up the airwaves for a week.

    One year ago, it didn't look like this was the way it was going to play out. It looked like a Hillary vs. Rudy race, but I wouldn't lay any odds on that now ... not even a long-shot.

    "Fool me once, shame on -- shame on you. Fool me -- you can't get fooled again." --George W. Bush

    by RevJoe on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:38:23 AM PST

  •  Rudy and Fred have to do a little better... n/t (0+ / 0-)

    Open the pod bay doors, HAL.

    by Minerva on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:38:51 AM PST

  •  My prediction: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Obama: 39
    Clinton: 29
    Edwards: 27
    Richardson: 5

    Record turnout breaks in favor of Edwards and Obama. Does anybody know if there will also be Exit polls tonight?

    (-8.00, -5.08) "Chase after truth like hell and you'll free yourself, even though you never touch its coat-tails." - Clarence Darrow

    by Mardish on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:38:59 AM PST

  •  my 2 cents (partly audaciously hoping) (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Obama 42
    Clinton 26
    Edwards 25
    Richardson 4

    Romney 34
    McCain 33
    Huck 15
    r0n p@V1 12
    none of the above 4
    Rudy 1

  •  If McCain and Obama win, (0+ / 0-)

    we're doomed, according to this insightful diary

  •  Obama McCain (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    AJsMom, Mardish

    Obama 44
    Hillary 34
    Edwards 15

    McCain 35
    Romney 33
    Huckabee 10
    Paul 12
    Rudy 8

    "We don't need to be raising the false hopes of our country about what can be delivered" -Hillary Clinton, NH Debate, 1/05/2008

    by nevadadem on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:40:07 AM PST

  •  a brokered convention (5+ / 0-)

    Now THAT'S a GOP convention that I'd actually watch.

  •  Easy-peasy (0+ / 0-)

     Obama's expectations are so high now that he needs to win by 25% just to match the pre-primary spin.  I predict he somewhat does less well, winning by only 20% with nearly 50% of the vote.  Clinton gets 25-30%, maybe less. Edwards crashes and burns, with 15-20% of the vote.  Richardson, Kucinich, and Krusty the Klown all tie.

  •  I have no freakin' clue but here I go... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Obama 51%
    Edwards 23%
    Clinton 21%
    Gravel 5% (yes this is a joke)

    on the Republic side

    McCain 27%
    Romney 21%
    Huckster 15%
    Paul 14%
    Giuliani 7%
    and the rest of the troglodytes make up the balance.

    I was so off the mark last time I wouldn't be surprised if Duncan Hunter pulls 2% and Mike Gravel shocks the world with 1%.  

    Don't be so afraid of dying that you forget to live. Nobody ever changed the world by sitting on their butt & complaining.

    by LionelEHutz on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:40:34 AM PST

    •  Hillary 3rd, I like that! (0+ / 0-)

      It puts her out at last. It would leave room for the two star candidates and best representatives of the party to contest the nomination. I like Obama, but Edwards deserves to make his case. And he has conducted his campaign honorably, unlike Hillary.

      •  I have no idea how to evaluate Edwards' chances (0+ / 0-)

        DK is wildly partisan for him, but the MSM don't seem to pay much attention to him.

        He did worse than DK expected in Iowa, but better than the MSM seemed to think he would.

        It's impossible to say what he'll do today. I put him in at 18% but he could go as high as 25-27%.

        I support Barack Obama, I respect Edwards and Clinton, I will vote for the nominated Democrat.

        by nightsweat on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:46:53 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  O O (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    libertyisliberal, Mardish

    Kiss of death - Scarborough just said the Bush team endorses Romney.  He's toast.

    Shut up, Joe.

    "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine 3900+ dead Americans. Bring them home.

    by Miss Blue on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:41:35 AM PST

    •  I've been watching Scarborough a lot recently. (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:
      Miss Blue

      Is it my imagination, or is he completely enamored with Obama? Brian Williams even seemed to be a bit in love with him, on this morning's show! Mika seems to be a Hillary girl..

      (-8.00, -5.08) "Chase after truth like hell and you'll free yourself, even though you never touch its coat-tails." - Clarence Darrow

      by Mardish on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:54:23 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

      •  Actually,,, (1+ / 0-)
        Recommended by:

        I've pegged Mica as an Edwards supporter, and I watch the show every morning.

        Joe is pretty much anyone but Hillary, but he does seem to like Obama.

        The trouble with some of these pundits, who want to look sane, it that I think they may be jumping on the Obama wagon just to look cool.  And not Republican racists.  Because no way does Joe or any other R spinner vote for Obama.

        "But your flag decal won't get you into heaven anymore"--Prine 3900+ dead Americans. Bring them home.

        by Miss Blue on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:11:30 AM PST

        [ Parent ]

  •  No clusterF#$k please! (0+ / 0-)

    A brokered convention could unite the Republicans.  I would rather see someone get the nomination that pisses off a significant segment of Republican voters.  The prospect of a clustF@#k, a brokered convention and a president Newt Gingrich is too much to bear.

    Great point about McCain suffering from Obama's attracting indies.  I still predict McCain by a couple points and Obama by a good margin.  I also will look at Huckabee's and Thompson's numbers - if they do significantly better (or worse) than expected it could be indictative of future Primary results.

    MQAblog If they hate us for our freedom they must really love us now.

    by MQAblog on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:41:49 AM PST

  •  My prediction (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pHunbalanced, Mardish
    Obama 36
    Clinton 29
    Edwards 20

    I think the polls, except for Rasmussen, are severely oversampling independents. This is critical, because the more independents you assume will show up, the better Obama does and the worse Clinton does. If it weren't for independents, this race would be a virtual tie. OTOH if you only counted independents, Clinton would be a distant third.

    I think we're going to get about 75% Dems and 25% Independents, because the McCain-Romney race is so close. Hence my prediction.

  •  Joe Klein is on NPR (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    right now so I'm hanging on his every word waiting for his predictions which, I am sure will blow Kos's out of the water.  He's always right - right?

    My faith in the Constitution is whole, it is complete, it is total. Barbara Jordan 1974

    by gchaucer2 on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:42:43 AM PST

  •  Watch out - Monday polling looks very different! (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sparhawk, milton333, libertyisliberal

    I have just trawled through the underlying tracking poll data from the past days, and there has been a big shift from day to day.

    Bottom line: while BO had a huge day on Sunday in Rasmussen, ReutersZogby and CNN/WMUR, averaging a 16-point lead in the Sunday sample (43.5-27.5), today's numbers from RR and Zogby both suggest that he dropped six points overnight to HRC.

    In other words, these two tracking polls came out with only a five-point lead for BO in Monday polling, 38-33.

    That is pretty consistent with both the Suffolk poll, Franklin and the FOX/Gallup projections, even though they do not have Monday data in their numbers.

    Based on this data, here is my prediction:

    1. HRC spins a "Comeback Kid 2" scenario if she is less than six points behind BO tonight, and the MSM will start playing the riff that she beat the spread and stalled BO's Big Mo.
    1. She declares herself the winner of the "Democratic primary", as BO will win thanks to Indies and she will get the Dem majority.
    1. That puts the Culinary Workers Union of NV under pressure to stick with the union candidate HRC tomorrow, locking up NV for HRC (who can then drop SC).
    1. HRC is back in contention, if not actually the driving seat, just like BC back in '92
  •  O-42 C-31 E-17 (N/T) (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    aaraujo, Mardish

    As previously predicted

    Proud Sponsor of Hope '08
    My Political (and moral) Compass: -9.00, -8.72

    by bmozaffari on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:43:32 AM PST

  •  kos, your predictions are hilariously wrong! (5+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Cixelsyd, jj32, citizenx, Mardish, mayim

    I can't believe you made such an ass out of yourself!

    Teh Daily Kos has really jumped the shark!

    Just thought I'd get that out of the way.  ;o)

    I have the distinction of being called a media whore by Courtney Love. -Maynard J. Keenan

    by arielle on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:44:14 AM PST

  •  Predictions from (0+ / 0-)

    Can be found here:

    Agree?  Disagree?

    Let us know.

  •  The great right wing conspiracy rides again... (0+ / 0-)

    Gotta be, right?

    Could Obama be financed by the Swift Boaters?

    Worse, Jerry Falwell?

    Oh wait, he's dead.

    Maybe the right explanation has been in our own back yard all along:

    I'm melting!  I'm melting!

    There really is no place like home.  Hil may be getting a chance to enjoy its comforts sooner than later.

  •  My Prediction (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Sparhawk, Mardish

    Obama     39
    Clinton   31
    Edwards   17

    McCain    35
    Romney    28
    Huckabee  13

  •  Oh Kos, how you tease us Obamaniacs... (0+ / 0-)

    With your kiss of death!

    I can get a straight job, I've done it before. I never minded working hard, It's who I'm working for.-Ms. Gillian Welch

    by LeftCoastBreakdown on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:45:31 AM PST

  •  Here's mine (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    pHunbalanced, Mardish

    Obama   41%
    Clinton 33%
    Edwards 21%
    Others   5%

    McCain   35%
    Romney   32%
    Huckabee 13%
    Paul     10%
    Guliani   9%
    Thompson  1%

    If Hillary Clinton wins, the Democratic Party loses.

    by Paleo on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:45:35 AM PST

  •  I think Edwards will have a surprising result... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    closer to tying or possibly fractionally beating Hillary Clinton for #2.

    There is definately some HRC fatigue out there, and last night's Dixville results, while tiny, were revealing to me.

    No disrespect to Hillary Clinton or her supporters. It's just my opinion.


    ...Operation Rota is Closed... New Blog Coming Soon With Pictures!...

    by nowheredesign on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:45:42 AM PST

  •  I too am rooting for Clusterfuck! n/t (0+ / 0-)
  •  I guess I need to add numbers to my prediction (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    from DarkSyde's thread


    Obama 48
    Edwards 25
    Clinton 21


    Romney 34
    McCain 28
    Huckabee 26
    Paul 10

    Note: These are all wild ass guesses and I just added Paul. They are based on absolutely nothing.

    -6.88 -6.31

    "They're all crazy. They're all crazy except you and me. Sometimes I have me doubts about you." -- Garrett Fort

    by Spathiphyllum on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:46:10 AM PST

  •  Obama overperforms / McCain underperforms (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    yodaddyfrommass, Mardish, clambake

    Obama's youth brigate will slip past the pollsters and into the polls again:

    Obama 44
    Clinton 31
    Edwards 19
    Richardson 4
    Biden 1

    McCain will post an underwhelming victory as independents kiss the GOP goodbye:

    McCain 32
    Romney 29
    Huckabee 16
    Paul 10
    Giuliani 10
    Thompson 3

    If you want to trust somebody with your taxpayer dollars, you'd better elect a Democrat because the Republicans can't manage money. - Howard Dean

    by CA Pol Junkie on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:47:50 AM PST

  •  GOP will nominate Ronald Reagan! (4+ / 0-)

    [Theremin music as in late night creature features intro]

    You might call him the Sleeper Candidate.

  •  Predictions (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Obama      38
    Clinton      32
    Edwards    25

  •  I won Iowa prediction thread and.... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    got no pony for it:

    Obama 31
    Clinton 27
    Edwards 27

    Final Results:
    Obama 37
    Edwards 30
    Clinton 29

    Pretty close to Kos (weird, that)....
    ...wild guessing of course....

    but by an Obama supporter.

    by Joes username on Thu Jan 03, 2008 at 10:38:37 AM PST

    So maybe you need to do the double to get some mojo around, the stars align:

    Obama - 43
    Clinton - 29
    Edwards - 19
    and for extra credit..
    Richardson - 9

    With the money I win I intend to buy a house so i can stop living under the bridge the Clinton's built to the 21st Century.

  •  Here's mine: (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Obama:     42%
    Edwards:   28%
    Clinton:   26%
    Richardson: 3%
    Kucinich:   1%

    McCain:   32%
    Romney:   29%
    Huckabee: 14%
    Paul:     13%
    Thompson:  8%
    Giuliani:  4%
    Hunter:   <1%</p>

    Someone honestly mistaken, when confronted with the truth, must cease to be one or the other

    by Inventor on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:50:23 AM PST

  •  My prediction (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    McCain 40 (he remains popular from 2004)
    Romney 25 (mostly from people in southern NH that hate Massachusetts)
    Paul 20 (strong libertarian element in NH)
    Thompson 8 (basically a none-of-the-others vote)
    Giuliani 3 (too alien to NH culture, seen as pushy and abrasive)
    Huckabee 3 (ditto, their fundies are not his fundies)
    Tancredo 1 (a few holdouts in the backwoods)

    - What happens on DailyKos, stays on Google.

    by Jon Meltzer on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:51:47 AM PST

  •  Mccaine win, not Mit Rumney (0+ / 0-)

    Coming Soon -- to an Internet connection near you:

    by FischFry on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:52:12 AM PST

  •  Gee Markos (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Phoenix Woman, LNK

    My numbers were closer.....:-)

    So here are my NH ones for reference......

    Hmmm..... Maybe I have a future in news, ala Sybil The Soothsayer in "Network" :-)

    "Doesn't everybody want to play hopscotch, bake cookies and watch the McLaughlin Group?" - Lisa Simpson

    by OneCharmingBastard on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:53:03 AM PST

  •  Who Cares? (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nightsweat, tmeyer

    about predictions?  

    Here's mine anyway:

    Obama 78
    Hillary 7
    Edwards 4
    Kucinich 11


  •  If he doesn't win the election (0+ / 0-) the very least, Barack Obama would be able to make some big bucks by endorsing Mountain Dew or 7-Up in a series of TV commercials, because he really knows how to sell himself to his cult of personality.

    Still, I think that issues voters will surprise us by turning out in high enough number for John Edwards as to continue to keep all three candidates competitive with each other.

    Vote John Edwards and break the corporate media stranglehold on American politics.

    by Subversive on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:53:34 AM PST

  •  You Are Very Good on the Repubs Until Paul (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    I think Huck just barely edges Rudy, but I do see the top two repubs coming in nearly even.

    For the dems I think it is closer,  but still a solid Obama win:

    Obama 38
    Clinton 31
    Edwards 25

    •  Although, if Paul does well anywhere (0+ / 0-)

      It's New Hampshire.  Maybe Texas as well, but New Hampshire has a lot of nuts who might think the gold standard is the way to go.

      I support Barack Obama, I respect Edwards and Clinton, I will vote for the nominated Democrat.

      by nightsweat on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:57:47 AM PST

      [ Parent ]

  •  Hell, I'll play (0+ / 0-)

    mostly just to have a place to keep my own guess (pen? paper? What are these relics of which you speak?)

    Obama: 36%
    Clinton: 28%
    Edwards: 25%
    Richardson: 5%
    Kucinich: 3%

    and, working backwards from the idea that Ron Paul will get:

    Paul: 15%
    Thompson: 6%
    Rudy9/11: 5%
    Huckabee: 18%
    McCain: 30%
    Romney: 25%

  •  I'd also love a brokered convention. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    But after New Hampshire, most of the delegate contests are at least winner-take-all by Congressional District, if not winner-take-all by state, as is my native Connecticut.  A brokered convention would be more likely if the Republicans more widely used the Democratic apportionment formula.  But under their current system, if one candidate gets broad geographic support in several big ticket states, he's likely to win the nomination, even if he's pulling only a plurality of the popular vote.

    "Our enemies are innovative and resourceful, and so are we. They never stop thinking about new ways to harm our country and our people, and neither do we."-GWB

    by BTP on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:58:44 AM PST

    •  agreed (0+ / 0-)

      I agree that the winner-take-all system makes the possibility of a brokered convention less likely. But even then, that system is predicated on the assumption that a single candidate will win multiple big states. If Romney can somehow keep afloat after today, it's possible that none of the leading 3 (him, McCain, and Huckabee) will lock up a majority of delegates.

  •  Report from NH: student volunteers (0+ / 0-)

    on Democracy Now this for Ron Paul, the other for John McCain. Both from small college in Wisconsin.

    Eegads were they misinformed! But they had passion for what they were doing because they liked and trusted their candidates.

    Alas, the late lamented Barbara Jordan said "Reason never failed us".....If only one could get facts and Reason on the table, on the airwaves......

    "The Science of Propaganda" and search NYPL website for "Lakoff"

    by LNK on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:58:59 AM PST

  •  My truthi predictions for NH (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Hey BB, Mardish

    Obama: 39%
    Edwards: 29%
    Clinton: 28%
    other: 4%

    McCain: 35%
    Mittens: 33%
    Jesus: 14%
    Paul: 11%
    Fred: 4%
    9/11: 3%

    yeah, Edwards over Clinton is wishful thinking...

    Never doubt that a small group of thoughtful, committed citizens can change the world.

    by cybersaur on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 08:59:20 AM PST

  •  My Prediction - hilter's Kitties ad gets removed (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dissento, MahFellaMerkins
  •  Predictions...Predictions! Predictions! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Obama     41
    Edwards   28
    Clinton   25

    Romney    30
    McCain    32
    Huckabee  16
    Paul      12
    Giulaini   4
    Thompson   3

  •  Here is mine (0+ / 0-)


  •  I predict that DEMOCRACY WILL BE THE WINNAR!! (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Hey BB, drmah

    Pardon me, I'm choking on some corn.


    That's better.

    "We've done the impossible and that makes us mighty."

    by Dissento on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:00:44 AM PST

  •  This prediction is ridiculous (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    Dissento, Mardish

    Alan Keyes will get a full 60% of the vote as a write in candidate. Everyone knows that.

  •  I'll play (0+ / 0-)

    Just for fun, though I have zero skills at this sort of thing, and I'm going way out on a limb:


    Obama     46
    Edwards   23
    Clinton   22

    Richardson 6


    McCain    33
    Romney    31
    Huckabee  14
    Paul       9
    9iu11ani   3
    Thompson   3

  •  A non-scripted GOP convention? Oooh! (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    A thrill went through me reading this:

    I am so rooting for "clusterfuck", even dreaming of a brokered GOP convention where Huckabee has a plurality of delegates, but still shy of the needed total, and is brushed aside (along with his theocon army) as Newt Gingrich sweeps in to save the day. Ahhh ... happy thoughts....

    Yup, wherein it is made crystal-effing-clear to the Fundies that they will never, EVER be allowed near the levers of GOP power.

    Except that the GOP leadership has forgotten that it doesn't know how to do a ground game any more.  Why?  Because for the past three decades, they've entrusted that scut work to (drum roll, please) the Fundies!  The very people they've been crapping on!

    And the Fundies will either jump to Ron Paul or convince the Huckster to go third party.


  •  Just pulling it out of my ... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    you know where:

    Obama: 43
    Edwards: 26
    Clinton: 26
    Richardson: 4
    Kucinich: 1

    It's open season for the Rethugs...  I'm not going to wager a guess but...  well, think of this:  Huckabee's appearences on Colbert aired last night!  He's due for another Colbert Bump!

    Boycotting CNN: biased news networks are bad for America, period.

    by jpfdeuce on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:03:27 AM PST

  •  My numbers. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Obama 39
    Clinton 31
    Edwards 25
    Kucinich 2
    Richardson 1

    McCain 35
    Romney 31
    Huckabee 12
    Paul 12
    Giuliani 6
    Thompson 3

  •  My predictions - hehehe (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Obama 48
    Edwards 24
    Clinton 20


    McCain 30
    Huckabee 24
    Romney 22
    Guiliani 8
    Paul 8
    Thompson 8

  •  Tiny effing clue, my guess (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Obama     48
    Edwards   32
    Clinton   20
    Richardson 10

    Romney    29
    McCain    34
    Huckabee  15
    Paul      15
    Giulaini   2
    Thompson   2

    Meanwhile, New Hampshire and Iowa are NOT representative of the USA. Aaargh.
    I miss Biden, Dodd, Kucinich, Gravel. I even miss Tancredo. We need more debate, not less. . . . but spare us the punditocracy.

    "The Science of Propaganda" and search NYPL website for "Lakoff"

    by LNK on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:04:35 AM PST

  •  National Press doesn't get NH/Mass dynamic (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Reporters refer to the fact that Romney is from a neighboring state as if it's a positive thing.

    Do they not realized the NH residents call us "Massholes?"

    "We've done the impossible and that makes us mighty."

    by Dissento on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:05:32 AM PST

  •  asdf (0+ / 0-)

    I foresee some system-gaming indies who, satisfied that Obama will cruise, game the system by pulling a GOP ballot for either McCain or for Ron Paul. The silver lining: watching Ron Paul's candidacy grow real legs, making the folk at Faux and the dark side's beltway consultants reach for analgesic medication.

    Some Clinton camp watchers will be utterly gleeful, claiming she's begun a comeback. The press won't pick up that version of the story, though.

    Obama     40
    Clinton   32
    Edwards   19
    Richardson 5
    Kucinich   2
    Biden      1
    Dodd       1
    Gravel     0


    McCain    36
    Romney    30
    Paul      18
    Huckabee  11
    Giulaini   3
    Thompson   2

    it's about biconceptualism ... Obama08

    by wystler on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:06:05 AM PST

  •  Here's mine (0+ / 0-)

    Obama 42
    Clinton 30
    Edwards 21

    McCain 31
    Romney 27
    Paul 15
    Huckabee 14
    Giuliani 11

  •  If Huckabee loses I predict (3+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    nightsweat, drmah, Ballard Mutt

    That he blames God and specifically points the finger at Jesus.

    OK, probably not.  But he should for consistency sake!

    "We've done the impossible and that makes us mighty."

    by Dissento on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:08:31 AM PST

  •  Obama and McCain are going to win big (0+ / 0-)
    Slick Willard and Hillary are going to be cobbered.

    I predict at least a nine point spread for McCain and a 14 point spread for Obama.

  •  WELL I'm not doing to bad myself... (0+ / 0-)
    On Fantasy Election I'm currently 9th place. This election season however has been (and will continue to be)a crazy one.. incredible, exciting and crazy... cant wait to see the results tonight...

    "We have nothing to fear but Fear itself."- Franklin D. Roosevelt

    by masonicword on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:10:19 AM PST

  •  DEAN started this wave in 2003 (0+ / 0-)

    Gov. Dean should  be credited with starting the OBAMA wave sweeping the Demo. primaries. He worked hard to bring a whole "NEW" generation of Demos. into the party and OBAMA is reaping the benefits of those efforts. The media in 2003/4 tried to kill this growing wave and it tried killing it in 2006. The Party establishment did its best to try and crush hope this yr. as well, but to no avail. The Demo. establishment is being shaken to its roots by what is happening today in New Hampshire. John Edwards has supplied much of the message but John isn't the messenger the public wants carrying it forward.

    "It's better to die on your feet then live on your knees" E. Zapata

    by Blutodog on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:10:42 AM PST

  •  My top 4s (0+ / 0-)

    Obama, Clinton, Edwards, Richardson

    McCain, Romney, Huckabee, Paul

  •  It's 61 in NH, OLD PEOPLE ARE VOTING. (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    HIllary wins by 1%

  •  I sure hope you got that GOP prediciton right. (0+ / 0-)

    And I think you are.

    Although I don't think any repug is going to have much of a chance in Nov, McCain is probably their best bet.  So I'd like to see a Romney win.

  •  Hey, the votes so far show (0+ / 0-)

    Obama - 70
    Clinton - 13
    Edwards - 13
    Richardson - 4

    Now I know us Obama supporters have a reputation as a bit crazed around here, but not like the Ron Paul guys!

    Anyway, a lot of the predictions have been pretty good - I apologize if I repeat echo somebody else's:

    Obama - 44
    Clinton - 28
    Edwards - 22
    Richardson - 5
    Kucinich - 1

    McCain - 34
    Romney - 32
    Huckabee - 17
    Paul - 8
    Giuliani - 6
    Thomson - 3

  •  C:36 O: 35 It is warm, old people are voting!!! (0+ / 0-)
  •  Here's some wishful thinking (0+ / 0-)

    36 / 28 / 28 / 7 / 1
    Obama / Clinton / Edwards / Richardson / Kucinich

    29 / 27 / 18 / 12 / 12 / 2
    McCain / Romney / Huckabee / Guiliani / Paul / Thompson

    "If there must be trouble, let it be in my day, that my child may have peace" --Thomas Paine

    by joanneleon on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:17:46 AM PST

  •  I hope your republican (0+ / 0-)

    prediction isn't just wishful thinking, because it eliminates the pesky McCain, the one guy who could give us real trouble in November.

  •  I am FIRED UP and READY TO GO.... (0+ / 0-)

    Good predictions KOS.

  •  I just hope Edwards breaks 25% 2night (2+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:
    drmah, pioneer111

    that'll make me happy ;-)

    We have a plain and tested device for keeping tabs on the government when it's keeping tabs on Americans. It is our Constitution~~Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse

    by PeckingOrder on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:19:03 AM PST

  •  Clinton will win this thing (0+ / 0-)
  •  mine (0+ / 0-)


    Fired Up. Ready to go!

    by bsmcneil on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:23:54 AM PST

  •  Predictions (0+ / 0-)

    Good Guys
    Obama     40
    Clinton   28
    Edwards   24

    Bad Guys
    Romney    30
    McCain    29
    Paul      18
    Huckster  17
    Thompson   9

    Bush will be impeached.

    by jgkojak on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:24:42 AM PST

  •  My Two Cents..... (0+ / 0-)

    Obama 41%
    Clinton 29%
    Edwards 22%
    Richardson 6%
    Kucinich 2%

    McCain 35%
    Romney 31%
    Huckabee 12%
    Giuliani 10%
    Paul 8%
    Thompson 2% and a McCain endorsement by Friday...

    "You share your young with the wolves of the nation...
    Theres nothing left til you pray for salvation"
    Black Rebel Motorcycle Club "American X"

    by Steve Singiser on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:25:21 AM PST

  •  As long as we're pulling numbers out of our asses (0+ / 0-)

    I think Obama wins, but it will be closer than Kos predicts:

    Obama     38
    Clinton     32
    Edwards   24
    Richardson 5

    On the dark side:

    Romney   28
    McCain     26
    Huckabee 14
    Paul         12
    Thompson 10
    Guiliani     7
    Hunter       2

    If it is this close, what will the impact be on Clinton and McCain; and  will Richardson soldier on?

    "I'm not a member of any organized political party, ... I'm a Democrat." Will Rodgers

    by CCSDem on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:27:29 AM PST

  •  Guarantee, not a Predicion ... (0+ / 0-)

    Obama 41
    Clinton 31
    Edwards 19
    Richardson 7
    Kucinich 2

    God 100
    Mere Mortals 0

  •  I'll stick with my Friday prediction (0+ / 0-)

    "I do not think that New Hampshire will be kind to Hillary either. I would think it would end up:
    Obama 45
    Hillary 30
    Edwards 25
    give or take a couple percent."

    -via Facebook wall comment to a friend (Clinton supporter)

    You must not lose faith in humanity. Humanity is an ocean; if a few drops are dirty, the ocean does not become dirty. - Mahatma Gandhi (-8.12,-7.49)

    by pleasedontbefake on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:31:19 AM PST

  •  Predictions (0+ / 0-)

    Obama     39
    Clinton   32
    Edwards   21

    McCain    32
    Romney    27
    Huckabee  18
    Paul      11
    Giulaini   9
    Thompson   2

  •  my New Hampshire crystall ball (0+ / 0-)

    Obama: 40
    Clinton: 30
    Edwards: 22
    Richardson: 6
    Other: 2

    McCain: 35
    Romney: 33
    Huckabee: 13
    Giuliani: 10
    Thompson: 5
    Paul: 4

  •  full predictions (0+ / 0-)
    Obama: 42
    Clinton: 28
    Edwards: 24
    Richardson: 6

    McCain: 40
    Romney: 28
    Huckabee: 13
    Giuliani: 10
    Thompson: 5
    Paul: 4

  •  I should avoid doing this (0+ / 0-)

    But why not..


    BO 43
    HC 32
    JE 15


    JM 30
    MR 27
    MH 13
    RP 11
    RG 4
    FT 3

  •  We all have a hole to pull numbers from (0+ / 0-)


    Obama 40
    Clinton 28
    Edwards 23
    Kucinich 5
    Richardson 4


    McCain 34
    Romney 26
    Paul 15
    Huckabee 14
    Thompson 6
    Giuliana 5

  •  Wow...if Newt is nominated... (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Would he end up with even 15% of the total vote?  I'd imagine Huckabee would take the evangelicals straight out of the GOP and into some independent ticket.

    Did anyone else notice the stern warnings that Brit (Deputy Dawg) Hume was issuing to the GOP rank and file on Faux Snooze Sunday?  He challenged the FACT that the GOP middle-class are unhappy with the economic performance, and must have been wearing an electronic shock collar under his rumpled shirt, because I swear everytime someone said Huckabee, I thought he'd launch into a barking fit.

    Perfect headline for November 2008..."Newt Leads GOP to Largest Loss in History."

  •  Hillary Comeback (0+ / 0-)

    The stage will be set...

    With all of your double digit predictions of how bad she will "lose"...

    When she loses by less than 10 points, the whole media will declare her the "winner"....

    Leading us all into Comeback kid, round 2.



  •  Ah, what the Hell (0+ / 0-)

    I'm with Kos on this, BIG win for Obama, but like Iowa, Edwards narrowly edges out HRC, to wit:

     Obama - 45
     Edwards - 26

     Clinton - 24

     The Rethugs - Who knows, who cares?
      But I suppose McCain edges out Mittney, and Ron Paul gives Huckleberry a run for #3 as the nut jobs are fired up. The mayor of 9/11 gets bombed, while Grandpa Fred falls asleep on the back porch, wondering if his SAG membership has lapsed yet.

    "We the People of the United States..." -U.S.Constitution

    by elwior on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:51:08 AM PST

  •  "Image over Issue" ™ (0+ / 0-)

    "Obama--the taste of a new generation" ®

    I can envision the corporate-sponsored TV commercials right now.  Don't think about the issues, just give us a big smile, speak in pretty abstractions a lot, and make pretend that everyone else is playing nice too....

    Obama has all of the earmarks of a passing fad, but let's just hope that if Obama does end up winning the primary, that his fad at least plays out the whole season through November.

    As I think everyone here can agree, all the Democrats--even Gravel--are far better than all of the Republicans.

    Vote John Edwards and break the corporate media stranglehold on American politics.

    by Subversive on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:54:01 AM PST

  •  More HPE than Prediction (0+ / 0-)

    HOPE 40
    Edwards 28
    Clinton 25
    Richardson 4
    Kucinich 3

    Obama had a machine in Iowa and I assume he can GOTV in NH too.  Margin of victory will likely be independents -- they don't like Bush anymore and fall for the "why can't we all just get along" spiel.  It's sad that non-Democrats play such a large role in picking the Democratic Party nominee.
    The only possible downside for independents is that they figure that Obama's already won, so they strategically vote for McCain.

    My guess is that with a larger turnout (and HRC's core group is older, female, reliable voters), HRC's core gets swamped.  I was suprised that HRC held back on her contrast/attack ads on HOPE.  I wonder if she figures that that might peel people off Obama but actually send votes to Edwards.

    Edwards ... well I just hope he's on an upswing and he brings lots of new voters out.  Hopefully the GOTV is better in NH than in Iowa.

    FYI: Hillary will break the NH Pledge tomorrow and come to Michigan to campaign (where she's the only candidate on the ballot).  She'll look for a fake headline "Hillary Wins Michigan, Recovers Momentum."

    So, Michiganders, vote Uncommitted and hope for a headline "Even Uncommitted Defeats Hillary, Clinton Drops Out."

  •  My Predictions (0+ / 0-)

    Please don't bet on them, they usually are more my hopes than predictions.


    Obama - 41
    Edwards - 27
    Clinton - 26


    McCain - 28
    Romney - 20
    Huckabee - 16
    Thompson - 12
    Gulianni - 10
    Paul - 8

    08 - Leaning Edwards, Obama, Kucinich, Gore, Clark
    -9.63 -6.92
    Fox News - We Distort, You Deride

    by rick on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 09:55:43 AM PST

  •  Predictions (0+ / 0-)

    Obama 43
    Hillary 35
    Edwards 15

    I think Hillary's emotions yesterday made here look more human and will help her among women, while Edwards comments won't.  Before yesterday, this was looking at a double digit win for Obama.

    McCain 34
    Romney 30
    Paul   15
    Huck   13

  •  Obama 32%, Clinton 28%, Edwards 20%,Richardson 15 (0+ / 0-)
  •  Obama 40%, Edwards 24, Clinton 21 Richardson 12.. (0+ / 0-)
  •  Latest New Hampshire Poll- Clinton Is UP! (0+ / 0-)

    She is closing the gap between herself and Obama.

    Suffolk/WHDH 01/06 - 01/07 500 LV 39 34 15 4 Obama +5.0

  •  So we have to base our candidate choice... (0+ / 0-)

    ...on the extent to which independents (people who aren't Democrats) decide to participate in our process or that of the Republicans?  That's how it goes, but it still sucks.  At least in Iowa, as was explained to me here when I asked, people had to register as Democrats (renouncing their previous condition of independent or Republican) to be part of their caucuses.

    "What you're saying is so understandable. And really, your only crime was violating U.S. law." Marge Simpson.

    by Rich in PA on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 10:08:51 AM PST

  •  Predicted results plus some reasoning (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Obama- 42
    Edwards- 26
    Clinton- 24
    Richardson- 6

    Obama blowout: Obama's got the MO and record turnout turned what should have been a relatively close caucus into a blowout for him.

    Edwards over Clinton: Edwards has been trending up (not to the extent of Obama) but he is getting some traction on the ground gaining between 1-2 points everyday. I also don't think anyone has a good measure of support, and he did really well at the debate (winning it in many estimates). His supporters are enthusiastic and enthusiastic supporters go out and vote. Clinton has been bleeding support, her campaign is in total disarray (which could GOTV operation). She has no MO, isn't getting any traction and her supporters have to be disheartened by the events of the past week. Disheartened supporters won't turn out like Edwards energized supporters.

    She was down to 28% in the last round of polling losing between 4-6 points a day. Edwards was up to about 22 points in the last round of polling. I think his GOTV (which was nonexistant in 04) should allow him to beat his 22% by 3 or 4 points. Putting him at 26%. Clinton hasn't stopped her slide if yesterday's gaffs are any indication and that means she should be at about 24-26%. Either way, Edwards close or an Edwards win will cause another round of panic in Hillary HQ.

    Richardson at 6%: Richardson has a decent base of support but with the overwhelming wave that is Obama and Edwards supporters being as energized as they are, I don't think he can pull from them. He gets about what he polls... 6%

    For the GOP...
    McCain- 34
    Romney- 28
    Huckabee- 15
    Paul- 10
    9/11- 5
    Thompson- Napping

    McCain will win: He's leading amongst GOP'ers, the newspapers hate Romney so any independents that vote for him (and a good chunk will) is just adding to the margin of victory for McCain.

    Romney is dead: Really does this need explanation?

    Huckabee does well: Probably the best Republican on the stump. That counts for something in New Hampshire. He's affable, likable, and quick on his feet. That also counts for something in New Hampshire. He's relatively moderate in the party when it comes to the environment and illegal immigration and I think his economic populism is a plus (remember Buchanan won NH).

    Paul: Completely depends if he can turn yard signs into vote. His is the one to watch. He could do better than expected as libertarianism has a strong streak in New Hampshire GOP politics.

    G9llaini: He's in serious trouble. Getting beat by both Huckabee and Paul... The headlines won't be kind.

    Thompson: Someone forgot to set the alarm clock, not that it matters because he isn't competing in NH in the first place.

  •  Obama 38, Clinton 35 Edwards 18 (0+ / 0-)
  •  Edwards 55%! (0+ / 0-)

    Im kidding, I'm kidding, I'm kidding.  Would be nice, though...


    Obama: 42%
    Clinton: 31%
    Edwards: 19%
    Richardson: 8%

    For the GOP:

    McCain: 33%
    Romney: 29%
    Huckabee: 13%
    Paul: 11%
    Giuliani: 9%
    Thompson: 5%

    I finally put in a signature!

    by Boris Godunov on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 10:15:35 AM PST

  •  my predictions (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:


    Obama       39%
    Clinton     36%
    Edwards     20%
    Others      5%

    (Notice that I have Clinton coming closer than most people currently guess. I think Barack is going to win tonight and will ultimately win the nomination, but that tonight will be much closer than Iowa).


    Sarge        33%
    Oily         31%
    Beagle Eyes  17%
    Bunny Ears   10%
    Carrot Face  7%
    Others       2%

  •  What's slowly slipping through the cracks here... (0+ / 0-)

    Is that before Iowa, Edwards was polling at 9% in NH.  Now he is sitting in the low 20s, after less than a week of people focusing on him in the NH.  

    This race really could come down to Obama vs. Edwards in a battle of ideas for change.  

    And that would be a good thing.  

    First, Obama having to talk about specifics would be good, because for his strong rhetorical skills, we haven't heard the extreme specifics that we do from Edwards.  And if the country is betting its future on a message of hope and change, we need the most information possible.  

    Second, if two candidates that are speaking of change face off, we might have a chance to see some truly progressive ideas get rooted into the minds of Americans, who will then have the chance to really get after their elected officials to enact some of the policies that they stumped on.  

  •  Obama (0+ / 0-)

    will get creamed in November.

    I hope Democrats vote Democrat in New Hampshire and not for Corp Lite BHO

    I'm sorry but Hillary at least will fight on some things, and Edwards on everything..but Obama is just going to sell this country even further down the road.

    •  Anything's possible ... (0+ / 0-)

      Obama's an unknown quantity.

      I believe the Pugs think he's easiest to beat.  Whatever they say publicly.  But they could be wrong.  Obama surprised us in Iowa.  He could do the same in the general.

    •  Once the reality of the fight sets in.... (0+ / 0-)

      I have seen nothing in Obama that says he is a fighter.  Oh sure, he plays a mean game of basketball, but it sure looks like he has caved in every difficult life situation.  

  •  Obama and Romney. (0+ / 0-)

    Obama 41%
    Clinton 26%
    Edwards 22%
    Richardson 9%
    Kucinich 2%

    Romney 31%
    McCain 28%
    Huckabee 15%
    Paul 8%
    Giuliani 8%
    Thompson 7%
    Hunter 2.9998%
    Keyes 0.0002%

    I have a hunch Romney will pull this off—barely.  All the independents going for Obama instead of McCain will no doubt help Romney, and I have a feeling it'll help him enough to brush past McCain.  But really, who the hell knows?

    A conservative is just a liberal who hasn't needed a second chance yet.

    by Larry McAwful on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 10:31:30 AM PST

  •  Richardson tanks (0+ / 0-)

    Even though he said:

    "I won the [ABC] debate, and I believe a lot of voters are going to look at me now"
    Bill Richardson
    Sunday, January 6, 2007

    His penchant for exaggeration, half truth & distortions is legion. I have no doubt that he knows full well that he did not do well in the debate.  He was clearly outshined by Obama, Edwards & Clinton in the ABC debate.

    I predict the candidates coming out of NH in this order:


    But Richardson won't drop out - he's looking to pick up delegates in Nevada, New Mexico, California & Arizona which he hopes to use to put Clinton over the top at the convention.  


  •  I am not on the Obama Bandwagon yet (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    but one thing i want to know from Obama is if he is elected president, will his politics of hope and working with republicans mean that we the american people will not find out whether or not the Bush Administrations broke the law and spied on the American People and committed other criminal acts, or will his politics of hope demand that his administration sweep under the rug any criminal acts by the Bush Administration for the sake of national healing.

    When i know this, then i will be able to really make up my mind on Obama.

  •  Guesses Out of Nowhere (0+ / 0-)

    Any Others--1

    Thompson and Others--2

    I expect many others to be much closer to the mark than me.

    •  That would be a huge win for Edwards (1+ / 0-)
      Recommended by:

      If he could score over 25% of the vote, that would almost certainly put a fork in Hillary and would really bring the showdown between Obama and Edwards on.  

      Even though you can't count out Hillary no matter what.  She has been at this much too long to bow out so easily.  

      •  Strange Year ... (0+ / 0-)

        I woudn't count anyone out or in.

        •  No doubt about it.... (0+ / 0-)

          I really would like to see Edwards and Obama go head to head.  

          I really don't think Obama would play as well against Edwards as he does against Hillary.  

          On ideas, Obama seems very middle of the road, let's not offend anyone, let's just all hold hands and hope that we can be one nation.  

          Where Edwards is, no one is going to give you a damn thing unless you go and take it.  

          Me, I am a fighter and was a poor Southern boy too.  So I know he is speaking the truth.  

          I can only hope that we get an honest conversation and that everyone has a voice in selecting the nominee.

          If not, I am behind Mayor Bloomberg.

  •  Kos, I'm dreaming too (0+ / 0-)

    I live in Saint Paul. I work right nearby (with a bunch of Dems, too...we've had some heated who-amongst-JRE-BHO-HRC-is-best discussions. The bliss of a new job.)

    I would love Clusterfuck '08 — GOP Style to come to my backyard. Protests galore. Rolling roadblocks as the Goopers try to take buses from their hotels to the convention center (which is going to be a clusterfuck in its own right).

    So, yeah, I am pulling for Romney. Even as someone from Massachusetts who is disgusted with him. If I were in NH and an undeclared (and if I lived there I might be just to be able to play spoiler), I might vote Republican for him (holding back the vom) to help him beat McCain and keep the brakes on the GOP's train in complete failure as they rumble along to fuckupery.

    One can dream, eh?

  •  US: (0+ / 0-)

    Obama     43
    Clinton   27
    Edwards   25
    Richardson 5


    Romney    32
    McCain    31
    Huckabee  20
    Paul      10
    Guiliani   5
    Thompson   2

  •  Obama has a snowball's chance in hell... (0+ / 0-)

    of winning the presidency.

    We all know it, but let's root for the underdog - it doesn't hurt.


    I'm with Kos on this longshot.  First time I've ever thought this was possible.

    But where's the GOP white horse who comes in to unify?  The GOP bench is quite shallow.

  •  It's Giuliani, not Guiliani, Giulaini, etc. (0+ / 0-)

    Kos, you seriously need to take five minutes and learn how to spell the guys name.

    How would you interpret Obamo, Oboma or Libeirmen, Lebirmann?

  •  Sure why not: Obama 35, Clinton 33, Edwards 22 (0+ / 0-)
  •  My Guesses (0+ / 0-)

    Obama  41
    Clinton  32
    Edwards  20
    Richardson  6

    McCain  35
    Romney  31
    Huckabee  14
    Guiliani  10
    Ron Paul  6
    Thompson  3

  •  Sparhawk's predictions (0+ / 0-)

    O - 37
    C - 32
    E - 25

    I think Obama's going to come in under expectations, though I hope I'm wrong.


    McC - 35
    R   - 33
    H   - 17
    P   - 15
    G   - 7
    T   - 7

    Hard to handicap the Repub race, so this is a quasi-educated guess. I think Ron Paul does much better than expectations as well due to the ferocity of his supporters.

  •  Obama 46, Clinton 27, Edwards 20, Richardson... (0+ / 0-)

    ..Richardson 6, Kucinich 1- - - Mark Penn will leave the Clinton campaign- - - Culinary Union will endorse Obama and hand him Nevada - - - Will the Clinton campaign surrender South Carolina to the Barack Star?

  •  my predictions (0+ / 0-)

    Obama 46%
    Clinton 33%
    Edwards 19%

    McCain 28%
    Romney 26%
    Huckabee 22%
    Paul 15%
    Giuliani 7%

  •  McCain 36, Romney 33, Huckabee 12, Paul 11,.. (0+ / 0-)

    Giuliani 6, Thompson 2...

    McCain ekes it out just barely

  •  all the way to Denver (0+ / 0-)

    Obama 40
    Clinton 35
    Edwards 20

    Romney 32
    McCain 30
    Paul 15
    Huckster 14

    Edwards drops out.

    Hillary will say if she had one more day she could have won.  That she is the Comeback Kid.  (An oldie but a goodie.)  She will skip SC and make her stand in the big states Super Tuesday, and then grind it out to the end.

    The Clintons Never Give Up.  They fight with all they have for as long as it takes.  There is already talk of the Clintons' wealthy friends starting a 527 to paste Obama.  They have wanted this their entire lives and they are not going away just because a bunch of bloggers don't like them.

    Hard to say how the Repub race develops.  If Romney wins NH then McCain may be out of money.  Huckster will continue, but the institutional support of the party may anoint Romney the anti-Huckster.

    And as I said upthread, don't dismiss Romney as a candidate especially against Obama.    

    Enterpriser; Hard core Libertarian: +6.63 / -4.41

    by jimsaco on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 11:28:19 AM PST

    •  The Clintons (0+ / 0-)

      [quote] They have wanted this their entire lives and they are not going away just because a bunch of bloggers don't like them.[/quote]

      Nice line.

      The Clintons have learned that if you keep fighting, you often win in the end.  Very often.

      This is a lesson more politicians should take to heart.

  •  Predictions (0+ / 0-)


    Obama      41
    Clinton    28
    Edwards    24
    Richardson  8


    McCain    36
    Romney    29
    Paul      15
    Huckabee  11
    Giulaini   6
    Thompson   3

    Committed to voting "Uncommitted."

    by GOTV on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 12:16:46 PM PST

  •  My predictions (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:


    Obama 40
    Clinton 31
    Edwards 26
    Richardson 2
    Kucinich 1
    Gravel 0


    McCain 36
    Romney 27
    Huckabee 14
    Paul 12
    Thompson 5
    Giuliani 4


    Morris 83
    Mehitabel 17


    Apple 34
    Pumpkin 21
    Cherry 20
    Mince 11
    Peach 8
    French Silk 6

    Dems in 2008: An embarassment of riches. Repubs in 2008: Embarassments.

    by Yamaneko2 on Tue Jan 08, 2008 at 12:33:16 PM PST

  •  Prediction (1+ / 0-)
    Recommended by:

    Obama: 41%
    Clinton: 31%
    Edwards: 16%
    Richardson: 6%
    Kucinich: 4%
    Gravel: 2%
    Other: 2% (Dodd, Biden still on the ballot, along with the other 10-12 whothehellcares Dems, and the two Veep nominees too, it's like a mini-ballot)

    Romney: 32%
    McCain: 24%
    Giuliani: 12%
    Huckabee: 11%
    Paul: 10%
    Thompson: 8%
    Other: 2%
    Hunter: 1%

    Just my guess

  •  My prediction (0+ / 0-)

    Not that anyone was waiting for this:

    49 - Clinton
    25 - Obama
    20 - Edwards
    4 - Richardson
    2 - Kooch, others

    •  Are you smoking something? (0+ / 0-)
      •  Because I give Obama 5 more points (0+ / 0-)

        than Kos did?

        I've outlined elsewhere that the same-day registration provision of New Hampshire law meant that more of his young and unregistered supporters could just show up and vote than would (or will) be true elsewhere.  

        My guess is that the turnout is once again beyond the wildest dreams of pollsters, who weight their polls to expected turnout.  

        So once again, we're off the graph set up by pre-election polling.

        But as to whether I'm smoking anything, sadly no.  It never seems to give me a buzz.  I get a buzz from chewing tobacco now and then, though.

  •  You're setting the bar high for Obama - 19 points (0+ / 0-)

    Come on, we should be happy if he wins by over 8 points like Iowa.  Why are you saying 19?  This could backfire and if Clinton comes in under 10 she looks like a Comeback Kid.  I think she will lose big today but let's not ruin the post-Primary game.

  •  predict edwards finishes second (0+ / 0-)

    Obama 36

    Edwards 30

    Clinton 28

    Kucinich 5

    Richardson 1

  •  Intrade website down? (0+ / 0-)

    Has anyone noticed that Intrade is down?  Bad time for it...

  •  Maybe 2nd for Edwards, maybe 1st Romney - or not (0+ / 0-)

    But really, this is my guess based on NHU poll and undecided/not certain voters

    For the Dems, with a 95% Confidence Interval, my prediction is:
    1  40 Obama (36-44%)
    2  28 Clinton (25-33%)
    3  28 Edwards (20-28%)
    4   3 Richardson (3-7%)
    5/6 1 Kucinich, Gravel, etc (1-3%)

    For the Reps, with no particular confidence at all

    1. McCain
    1. Romney
    1. Huckabee
    1. Paul
    1. Giuliani
    1. Thompson
    1. Hunter

Subscribe or Donate to support Daily Kos.

Click here for the mobile view of the site