The results are coming in. Comment here to follow all of the action for this historic Super Tuesday.
This year, both parties were poised to dilute the initial flavor that Iowa and New Hampshire added to the nomination process. Instead of allowing the process to simmer for months, almost two dozen states—including Illinois--scheduled their nomination contests for February 5th.
This created the closest thing we've ever had to a national primary, but now we hear the critics complaining that this rushed process does not allow campaigns to connect fully with the citizens. We also saw that instead of reducing the role of Iowa and New Hampshire, the new timing had the exact opposite effect with candidates from both parties spending records sums of money and time in those early states.
What type of system will the party chefs cook up next time? They could create a national primary day with 50 states expressing their preference at once. Or they could change the timing of the process to create a system of rotating regional primaries as a more orderly way to proceed to the nomination.
The answer is anyone's guess, but we can accurately predict that any new recipe to create a nominee will have its fair share of critics and will probably continue to change for the next 200 years.
(From CBS 2 School)
67 comments:
Not a surprise, but a big early start for Barack Obama, who is already projected to be the winner of Georgia primary. Obama led by 20 points in the last poll in the Peachtree State, but exit polls have him rolling among black voters, and being very solid in many other demographics.
Early counts have Obama up 64% to 30% which could mean a sweep of all of the state's 35 delegates.
Having already won the GOP West Virgina Convention, Mike Huckabee appears to have the traction of southern evangelical voters.
In Georgia, exit polls suggest that Huckabee carried 64% of the Evangelical vote.
While Tim Russert called Huckabee "a blocking back," for John McCain, Chuck Norris' guy may do much better than projected, especially in the south.
What would that do to the claims of right-wing radio hosts like Rush Limbaugh and Laura Ingram, who have spent the last few days bashing John McCain. MSNBC's Howard Finemann reported that Ingram called Huckabee's staying in the race up till now, "a plot by the McCain campaign."
Nine states, including Illinois polls have just closed and Obama has been declared the winner in our state.
Likewise, Hillary is the declared winner in Oklahoma.
On the Republican side, John McCain is the declared winner in: Illinois, New Jersey and Connecticut.
Mitt Romney has been declared the victor in his home state of Mass. McCain campaigned there yesterday, hoping he cold really shock and knock out his chief rival in his own backyard.
In case you were wondering how news agencies can make projections minutes after the polls close, this is from ABC News:
ABC News relies on a team of social scientists and journalists to project election winners. This team, called the Decision Desk, is overseen by three experienced decision makers, all of whom hold Ph.D.s in the social sciences and are experts in quantitative methods.
To project a race, the Decision Desk analyzes exit polling and actual vote data using a variety of statistical models. The Decision Desk waits until the models indicate that there is at least a 99.5 percent certainty that the leading candidate is the winner. The team also considers the possible impact of absentee and early voters and a number of other factors, which vary by state
If It's Too Close to Project
ABC News will not project any races where the margin between the candidates is less than one percentage point in the tabulated vote, even if 100 percent of the precincts have reported. This is because many votes may be outstanding even with 100 percent of precincts reporting (e.g., absentee and provisional ballots).
Also, the county vote data on election night are unofficial tallies, so there may be errors that could affect the results in a close race.
I'm gonna end up watching this all night, but I still don't like the closing minute projections. Not only to question its process of determining a winner that fast, but considering how the delegates in the Democrat races are proportional, I'd rather hear to final vote, knowing percentages.
Hillary Clinton has just been projected the winner in Tennessee and Arkansas.
seems like hillary just took massachusetts, new jersey, new york, and oklahoma as well
So far on the Democratic side:
Clinton Wins: NY, NJ, OK, MA & TN
Obama Gets: GA, IL, AL & DE
Goodnews for Barack: 80% black vote and about 45% white vote. "Seems very electable around the country to me,'' said MSNBC conservative host Joe Scarborough.
Good News for Hillary: Campaign calls victory over Obama in MA and the endorsements of Sens Kennedy and Kerry and MA Gov. Duvall Patrick, "one of the big surprises of the night."
Two weeks ago Obama, who has 38% in MASS, was polling at 22%...That's called the law of diminishing returns.
DNC chairman Howard Dean said the delegate count won't be done till about noon tomorrow. "We have no idea what the delegate count is at this point. It's all about delegates."
I wish Chris or Keith would have asked him about the inner politics that has disenfranchised delegates in Michigan and Florida....
That's not to say that I think Hillary has earned those delegates.
In breaking down Hillary's wins in NY and NJ, exit polling suggests that she won the Latino vote 2-1, which may factor into play in California.
Also, Hillary solidly leads in the popular vote early in Missouri -- called a bellweather state because whoever wins the Show Me State usually gains the nomination or the the presidency.
The state I’m most interested in (along with the media) is California. California has more than a fifth of the delegates required for the Democratic nomination. Almost all of the polls indicate a statistical tie in the state between Obama and Clinton. I think one of two possibilities will determine the winner.
1) Between 20-50% of the ballots cast in California for this primary are absentee ballots and early voting ballots, which will take a long time to count. These ballots will most likely benefit Hillary Clinton, because they were cast when she was leading in the state by double digits.
2) Obama has had incredible momentum in California and over the course of weeks has eliminated Clinton’s commanding lead. I’m thinking the youth vote in California will definitely help Obama.
I think Clinton will narrowly win in California because of possibility #1.
Because of California’s extensive use of paper ballots, absentee ballots, early voting, and 10 PM CST closing time, we won’t know the winner there probably until tomorrow.
Clinton has an impressive lead over Obama in Missouri, while Obama has a narrow lead over Clinton in Connecticut. Obama has a strong lead over Clinton in Minnesota and I expect him to win there.
Personally I’m supporting Hillary Clinton for the nomination.
I thought it was interesting (and typical) that as she was doing 27 morning interviews, Hillary stated that she had more delegates going into today. Not exactly true, in committed delegates by primary performance. She was, of course, counting her promised Super Delegates. (Reminder that in that non-democratic way of the DNC, Super Delegates are party insiders and officials who can change their votes).
Western wins for Obama in North Dakota and Utah give both Democratic candidates 6 states apiece.
Here’s how the Republicans are doing:
McCain: Oklahoma, Illinois, Connecticut, New York, New Jersey, Delaware
Romney: Massachusetts, Utah
Huckabee: Arkansas, West Virginia, Georgia, Alabama
I think a lot of people are surprised by how well Huckabee is doing, especially in the South. He is currently leading in Missouri and Tennessee.
Huckabee is currently leading Romney in the state count.
Barack Obama has just been declared the winner in North Dakota with 61% of the vote.
Mike Huckabee is speaking now having won three states (AL, AK, WV) and leading in the Bellweather of Missouri.
He said:
"The 2nd Amendment needs to be respected as much as the 1st Amendment."
From the Soap Box: I don't see Jesus saying, "I love my guns, I love my guns".....especially after 5 women were shot to death last weekend at a Tinley Park store....Is this guy and his supporters really serious?
I’m predicting the following results for the Democratic race based on the latest polls, analysis, & momentum:
Clinton: Missouri, Arizona, California
Obama: Kansas, New Mexico, Idaho, Minnesota, Colorado
I think Obama will do and is doing well in traditional red states because of his crossover appeal to Independents and Republicans.
Obama's strategy for winning small states is working well. Unlike Clinton, he had organization in small states such as North Dakota and Idaho.
Connecticut is still too close to call but I’m predicting a narrow win for Obama.
Hillary 08
Kansas (72%) another big win for Obama. It seems like Obama's wins have been much larger, although both Barack and Hillary are both carrying 65% in their home states.
Remember, delegate calculis. If a candidate collects 65%+ in a congressional district they would get 3/4. Any less than 65, could be 2/2.
Here's the current expected Democratic delegate count (courtesy of ABC News)
Clinton:432
Obama: 371
Delegates Needed To Win Nomination: 2025
Clinton leads by 61 delegates.
Connecticut and Kansas just went to Obama.
As an Obama victory in Connecticut was announced, giving Barack 8 states to 6 for Hillary so far, Clinton campaign chair Terry McCaulliffe claims that his candidate has, "Big Mo tonight."
Obama just won Minnesota.
Romney so far has had a disappointing night. He's won Utah and Massachusetts, but that was expected. His speech just now indicated no sign of defeat. Romney really needs to win California, which he might very well because he and McCain are in a statistical tie.
Democratic Delegates Won Tonight (ABC News):
Obama: 197
Clinton: 190
2025 needed to win.
Having won his home state of MA and the "mormon base" state of Utah, but nothing else (though he still has high hopes for California), Mitt Romney is speaking to supporters in Mass.
"There are some that thought this would be over tonight. But this candidate is going on."
If he does not win California and Huckabee wins more states than him can he afford to go on? Well, of course he can because he's a millionaire. But would it be a prudent invenstment to go on?
ABC News just announced that...
Clinton won 50% of the late deciders' votes
Obama won 41% of the late deciders' votes
Obama and Clinton are now only a few delegates apart in the total count so far.
McCain still has A LOT MORE than his nearest opponent.
Speaking of money, can Huckabee afford to go forward in the campaign? I know that he will raise a lot of money after his success tonight, but is that enough to catch up to the seemingly unstoppable McCain?
NBC is projecting Huckabee in Georgia, where he seems to be solidifying the South. Mississippi Gov. Haley Barbour said. "Mike Huckabee's had a very good night."
The conservative Barbour said any of the Republicans still running "could carry his state, considering the liberal records of either of our two opponents."
Salek, yours is a good question.
If Romney solidifies a nitch in the west, then Huckabee I think will have a hard time.
Romney and the front-runner, McCain will have much more money and Huckabee will be distanced from his Southern base.
Bill Richardson was just on ABC.
He commented on Clinton's success with Latino voters and Obama's appeal to young voters.
He still hasn't endorsed anyone, even though Bill Clinton did watch the Super Bowl with him on Sunday.
If the Clinton-Obama or Obama-Clinton ticket doesn't work out (as many are predicting), I personally think Richardson would be a great runningmate for both candidates. He could help Obama get the Hispanic vote, and also provides geographical balance to Clinton (NY) and Obama (IL).
In speakng to her supporters in NY, Hillary mentioned the little known victory in American Samoa (delegate count??) as well as the victims of deadly tornadoes in Tenn & AK. She the showed this is far from over, pushing people to join her campaign be accessing her website.
"Politics is not a game. It's your lives, your families, your futures,'' she said.
I think Bill Richardson would be on either's short list. Apparently, Ted Kennedy tried to get Richardson to endorse Barack to no avail.
Also, has anyone heard from John Edwards tonight?
Salek, how has ABC's coverage been? I've been mostly flipping between MSNBC and CNN.
16 Democratic States counted:
Obama 10 wins
Clinton 6 wins
Both Huckabee and Clinton seem very upbeat and optimistic.
I'm expecting Huckabee to do well in Texas, which has a lot of social conservatives and is in Huckabee's backyard. Who knows maybe that will lead to a divided convention?
Obama and Clinton are extremely close in the number of delegates. Will this motivate Clinton even more to seek the Democratic Party's reinstatement of the Michigan and Florida delegates? How would the Obama campaign react? I would expect a lot of anger and interal division in the party.
Also if there is a divided convention, how would Democrats react to superdelegates, elites with disportionate power, choosing their party's candidate?
Do you think that McCain will feel like he owes Huckabee anything for the way he has siphoned social conservative votes away from Romney? Something like a spot alongside him on the Republican ticket?
I think Huckabee would certainly be a logical choice as a running mate for McCain. Huckabee would be able to secure the votes of social conservatives, a group that McCain has had trouble courting. He would help McCain to lock up the Solid South. And I think that Huckabee would also serve as a tremendous asset on the camapaign trail - he is extremely personable and a very effective communicator.
Mr. Wolak, as for your comments on Huckabee's position on the Second Amendment, his extreme emphasis on gun rights was part of what swayed me personally into the McCain camp after originally supporting Huckabee. But I have to say that your comment was a bit of a low blow coming from way up there on the soap box.
ABC 7s Andy Shaw called California, "A crazy quilt. One poll showed Obama up by 13 points, one poll showed Clinton up b 13 points."
MSNBC is calling CA "Too Close to Call."
I've been watching CNN's live stream online as well as ABC's broadcast. CNN seems to focus a lot more on each individual campaign while ABC is focusing on general trends and demographics.
It seems that Romney just won North Dakota and has a solid lead in Montana.
Watching MSNBC, if current trends hold true, it seems the main battle of California would be Independent voters who favor Obama versus Hispanics that polls show a lean towards Clinton. It'll be interesting to see how that plays out.
I think a McCain/Huckabee ticket probably makes alot of sense, and they do seem to like each other. Nobody running on the Republican side seem to like Romney, who has the conservative talk radio heads on his side. Romney was the winner of votes of those who considered themselves "very conservative."
Jeremy, my opinion only from the Soap Box.
But from what you said, as an intelligent conservative, gives more legitimacy to what I say. By digging in on the 2nd amendment and what he calls "so called assault weapons," and linking it as just as important to our right to free speech, press, religion, assembly and petition, is just troubling.
Historic democratic infighting at conventions, contrasted by the GOP getting behind their guys, is the reason while you get the old political axiom, "Only the Democrats could screw this up."
With the potential delegate fight, history, as they say, may repeat itself in this historic eletion season.
Here are some Illinois exit poll numbers:
Obama won 94% of the Black vote in Illinois.
Obama won 52% of the Hispanic vote in Illinois, which is better than Clinton's 47%.
Some analysts are saying that it is not good for Obama if he is only getting 52% of the Hispanic vote in his own homestate.
While voter turnout has been historically high for primaries thought the season, especially on the Democratic side (one precinct in Kansas expected 500 voters and drew over 2,000), Cook County Clerk David Orr said voter turnout was less than the 40% (which would have been a record for a presidential primary) they were looking for.
It was reported that one female election judge in Cook Country was charged with battery when she punched another female election judge when setting up voting machines. Fortunately, nothing o the police blotter form WV election judges.:]
Kane County's main election computer went down, and they have yet to post any results.
Romney was just declared the winner in Minnesota (41%)and Montana (39%).
Obama was just declared the winner in Idaho (75%)
Clinton wins Missouri (50%) and Arizona (51%).
With 9% of California precincts reporting, Clinton (55%) leads Obama (32%). No conclusions should be made just yet, California being such a large and unpredictable state, but I'm really hoping Hillary Clinton wins tonight.
McCain just declared himself the Republican frontrunner to great applause.
Hillary 08
I'm not sure Missouri should be declared for Clinton yet. Even though 93% of the ballots have been counted, there's less than a 10,000 vote lead. I almost had a heart attack when I saw how close it had become.
Sen. Dick Durbin also said Barack "Had the Big Mo."
In listening and contrasting Hillary and Barack's speech. I heard Hillary taking alot about "what I've done."
In Barack's message, It's "Our time has come." and "Yes, we can."
Maybe it's just me.
Obama also offered condolences to the tornado victims and called on the Federal government to respond quickly.
I didn't here any of the Republicans talk about the tornado victims. Did McCain, Romney or Huckabee say anything?
Obama is delivering an inspirational speech in Chicago, and is displaying his usual wit, charm, and confidence.
"Our time has come...Our movement is real...Change is coming to America!"
-Barack Obama
When he was speaking of national unity and equality, Obama seemed to evoke the charisma of the great Dr. Martin Luther King.
In a strange election twist, Democratic 14th Congressional district candidates Bill Foster and John Laesch ran two races. One to tke over the vacated seat by former Speaker of the House Denny Hassert. The other was the primary for the district's permanant seat, which will be decided in Nov.
It is/was for the candidates to each win on of the races, though as of now, Foster led both races narrowly.
He would look to square off with ice cream magnet Jim Oberweiss (who defeated Chris Lauzen) for the house seat next Nov.
Romney just won Colorado (54%)
Obama just won Colorado (65%)
Huckabee wins Tennessee.
Here are the total delegate counts as of now (courtesy of the Newshour with Jim Lehrer):
Republican (need 1191 to win)
McCain 340
Huckabee 120
Romney 79
Paul 4
Democratic (need 2025 to win)
Clinton 408
Obama 318
Mr. Wolak, how do you think Jim Oberweis is going to do against the Democratic nominee? Oberweis hasn't always succeeded in the past when running for office. This could be his time to win, after all the 14th Congressional District is solidly Republican/conservative.
THE ASSOCIATED PRESS HAS JUST PROJECTED HILLARY CLINTON TO BE THE WINNER IN CALIFORNIA.
Clinton 55%
Obama 32%
AP projects a Clinton victory with 14% of the precints reporting.
AP also projects McCain to win in California (13% precincts reporting).
McCain 44%
Romney 25%
McCain has also been projected to win Missouri.
Hilary Clinton won California...!
But Obama's doing well still.
obama is winning missouri 49%-48% with 98% counted. i think california is still too close to call b/c of its size, even though hillary is winning by a sizable margin.
According to both CNN.com and ABC News, the latest numbers show Obama (49%) leading Clinton (48%) in the popular vote in Missouri, which is interesting because a local news station just had Missouri on the map as a Clinton victory. Hmm...Missouri's Democratic primary just keeps on getting more interesting.
Experts are saying that Obama is doing well in the state's urban areas and Clinton in the rural areas. It should be remembered that victory in the popular vote may not translate into the most delegates.
If Clinton's huge lead in Missouri can disappear, maybe the same can occur in California. We'll just have to wait and see.
Obama (73%) has been projected to win the Alaska caucuses.
dems: feb 5 delegates so far 137-130 in favor of obama. total is 371-306 for clinton. republicans: feb 5 mccain 363- huckabee 76- romney 57. overall: mccain 475- romney 151- huckabee 105 (which i had remembered seeing higher on tv at around 146...)- paul 6
Chuck Todd on MSNBC projected a final delegate estimation as being:
Obama 841
Clinton 837
Obama won Missouri, the bellweather and Alaska late. New Mexico was still out.
Also, the Romney campaign has planned 'frank discussions" for tomorrow.
romney will probably complain about huckabee in his interview tomorrow and talk about the crooked deal that mccain worked out so that huckabee stole west virginia from romney.
New Mexico votes are still being counted this morning. With 92% of the precincts reporting, Obama (49%) leads Clinton (48%) by less than six hundred votes. Even if Obama narrowly wins the state, I expect each candidate to basically get the same number of NM delegates.
Although Obama's campaign and the media will treat Missouri as a significant victory (Missouri being a bellwether state), don't expect much of a difference in how many delegates he and Clinton receive.
For the latest on delegate allocation state-by-state, I recommend the following C-SPAN site:
http://hosted.ap.org/dynamic/files/elections/2008/by_state/US_Page_0205_D.html?SITE=CSPANELN&SECTION=POLITICS
I stayed up late last night watching the elections (even though i was sick) and I found the results to be very suprising. I think that although my political commentators believed that after tonight the two frontrunners would be determined, at least in the Repulbican primary, it seems that the party's nomination for president is still up for grabs. On the Democratic side, Obama, winning Illinois by a large number and other key states across the country, showed that he is still a viable candidate who has widespread support, while Clinton, picking up important states from Connecticut to California showed she also has a great number of supports, espeically those of hispanic race and those of 50. On the Republican side, while John McCain came out as the overall victor, Mike Huckabee's suprising showing the in the south, and Mitt Romney's lack luster night, showed that all three candidates still have a chance of getting the party's nomiantion. As for Mike Huckbee, I believe that he has moved into the "Top Four," replacing Romney as the "consevative" choice for the Republican party.
Lastly, I think that is quite intresting that so many states moved up their primaries so they could be part of the Super Tuesday action and an important part of the primary process, yet it is looking like the states who waited will truly be the determining factor in which two candidates will be on the ballot in November.
- Jenny
Hillary Clinton is NARROWLY leading Barack Obama in New Mexico by only 210 votes (98% of the precincts reporting).
As of late Wednesday afternoon, the scorecard of pledged delegates -- Won by candidates in primaries and caucuses; pledge to support their candidates at the national conventions -- couldn't get any closer.
Hillary -- 625
Barack -- 624 (CNN)
A slim difference may be drawn from the candidate's home state victories:
New York:
Hillary 57-40% win (+17%)
Hillary 127-87 delegate win (+40)
Illinois:
Barack 65-33% win (+32%)
Barack 72-37 delegate win (+35)
Once a Second City, Always a Second City?
Also, it would be cool if somebody tabulates all of Tuesday's popular votes and compares it to the delegate collection. Is this system viable in giving the power closer to the people (in their districts), or does it take the power away, the way many criticize the Electoral College system?
Although Clinton and Obama essentially tied on Super Tuesday, the path ahead seems to favor Obama. Here's why:
Seven Democratic contests are coming up in the next week.
Sat 2/9 Louisiana, Nebraska, Washington
Sun 2/10 Maine
Tue 2/12 Maryland, Virginia, District of Columbia
1) Four of these contests are in areas with a significant number of African-American voters(LA, MD, VA, DC). So far Obama has done extremely well in states with large African-American populations (Georgia, Alabama, South Carolina).
2) Three of these contests are state caucuses (Washington, Nebraska, Maine). Obama has impressive organization in caucus states, having won 7 of yesterday's 8 caucuses. Also, Hawaii is holding caucuses on 2/19, and Obama (who was born and spent part of his childhood there) is expected to do well.
3) Obama raised $32 million in January, compared to Clinton's $13 million. This could be a sign that at least in terms of fundraising Obama is dominating, inspiring supporters to reach deep into their pockets. It is also being reported today that Clinton recently loaned $5 million to her campaign. An unprecedented long primary season will require candidates to consistently raise large amounts of money to stay competitive.
4) Obama has momentum. A month ago no one would have imagined him doing so well on Super Tuesday. It seems that the more time Obama has to convey his message and interact with voters, the more they like him.
5) States where Clinton can do well are a month or more away, such as Ohio (3/4), Texas (3/4), and Pennsylvania (4/22). By then, Obama may have closed the gap between him and Clinton.
Whatever happens, the race for the Democratic nomination will certainly not be coming to an end soon.
Well I really dont think McCain will have much trouble now. He has twice as many delegates as everyone else and has massive momentum. Huckabee may take the south but since Rommeny has bashed both Huckabee and McCain I doubt Huckabee will go with Rommeny. Meanwhile Ron Paul is going about his business.
I was amused last night and this morning when I saw CNN and Fox predict that Hiliary won Missouri but then awoke this morning to see Obama had actually won Missouri. Since news programs only predict winners when they are 99.5% sure the canidate will win I guess that means Obama has insane luck since he won with a .5% chance of winning.
I was surprised to hear some of the CNN guests last night talking about how McCain didn't do as well as he expected to. I definitely expected Huckabee to do well in the Bible Belt, and I didn't think it strange that Romney got Utah and Massachusetts. McCain, somewhat cautiously declaring himself the frontrunner, didn't seem like he had walked into Super Tuesday with audacious expectations. I think he had a successful night, and that he'll continue to do very strongly.
But no matter what, even when all the other candidates are fluctuating wildly in their popularity between states, you can always count on Ron Paul to have his 5% (give or take 2%).
As of 10:45 a.m. Thurs., Feb. 7, 2008, MSNBC was reporting this delegate (pledged) scoreboard:
DEMs (2,025 to win):
Obama 838
Clinton 834
Edwards 26
GOP (1,191 to win):
McCain 720
Romney 256
Huckabee 194
Time.com's blog (Swampland) has reported the interesting (really even closer) popular vote totals:
Total votes cast in 21 GOP contests yesterday among McCain, Romney and Huckabee:
McCain: 43.1% (3,611,459)
Romney: 35.4% (2,961,834)
Huckabee: 21.5% (1,796,729)
For grand totals, vastly more Democrats than Republicans voted yesterday;
Democratic votes for Clinton and Obama: 14,622,822 (63.6%)
Republican votes for McCain, Romney and Huckabee: 8,370,022 (36.4%)
I have re-done my calculations with the latest vote totals as of 4:30 p.m., and guess what?
The raw numbers grew a bit, but the percentages are exactly the same.
Clinton: 50.2% (7,427,942)
Obama: 49.8% (7,370,023)
Now keep in mind, this is just among those voting for Obama or Clinton. If you add in Edwards and Uncommitted, etc., the percentages would change slightly, but the point is the same. That breakdown looks like this:
Clinton: 48.7%
Obama: 48.4%
Edwards: 2.7%
Uncommitted: 0.17%
Biden: 0%
Richardson: 0%%
Mitt Romney is out.
(CNN) -- Mitt Romney suspended his bid for the Republican presidential nomination Thursday, saying if he continued it would "forestall the launch of a national campaign and be making it easier for Sen. Clinton or Obama to win."
Romney made the announcement Thursday afternoon at the annual Conservative Political Action Conference in Washington.
With Romney out, Sen. John McCain is locked in as the front-runner in the GOP race.
Romney had won 286 delegates in through the Super Tuesday contests, compared with McCain's 697.
The crowd booed when Romney mentioned McCain, saying, "I disagree with Sen. McCain on a number of issues."
Last March, Romney was made the "preferred candidate" by the CPAC conference:
About a third of the 6,000 attendees at the three-day conference voted in the poll. Mr Romney won with 21 percent of the vote, followed by Mr Giuliani, with 17 per cent. Senator John McCain, the only Republican presidential front-runner not to attend CPAC, languished in the poll, ranking fifth with 12 percent.
I'm not totally surprised that Mitt Romney decided to drop out of the race. Romney, given his strong business background, is a numbers man, and after a disappointing Super Tuesday, he would have realized that his chances of winning the nomination were slim.
During yesterday's evening broadcast, ABC said that Romney so far had spent about $1.3 million for each delegate that he had won. At that rate he would have spent more than a billion dollars to win the required number of delegates. Ultimately the presidential race wasn't a successful investment for him.
After learning this, Huckabee's success in the South is even more impressive. Of the Republican candidates he so far has spent the least for each delegate that he's won. If he can be so successful with relatively little money and is able to capture Romney voters and those skeptical of McCain, then just maybe Huckabee can win the nomination.
Right now I'm waiting to see who Romney ends up endorsing.
I can say right now the Republican nominee will be McCain. The Democrats may go with Obama, though that's going to be close. My biggest question is, what spoiler effect will Ron Paul and Mike Gravel have? Based on the Christian Right group Huckabee appeals to, Ron Paul will probably splinter his votes and allow McCain, who appeals to a broader range of audiences, to take more states. I'm not so sure about Gravel, since Hillary and Obama have similar platforms, but I know he'll ruin one of them.
In the case of Mitt Romney, he's dropping out so he can run again in 4 years. that is the one and only reason why. If he ruins his already horrible image this time, then he has absolutely no chance at a second go, because he does have the deep pockets to keep going. In saying that, the Republicans will be quite smart to nominate McCain, because he has the best chance to beat a democrat. Should they nominate huckabee, he will win the evangelical vote, because he will not certainly win the mc, financial conservative vote with policies like progressive tax. saying that, I think that Obama and Clinton need to be careful. Should they continue to run against each other up until august, they will destroy each other and divide the democratic party, which is exactly what they don't want. They will divide between young and old, white and black, black and hispanic, lower class and upper class, and change and experience (if they haven't already). To be perfectly honest, the best possible way to handle this is to have them both run on the same (SUPER)ticket. The ticket would be unstopable either way. Because with obama's likeablility as president, and hillary's strong appeal to based democrats, they could win any election by a large margin. If obama is VP that will set him up to be president after Hillary Clinton. Either way, the best situation is to run on a single, united ticket. That will ensure 16 yrs of democratic governance in D.C. Now just to settle that nasty three way presidency between Hillary, Bill, and Barack.
Post a Comment