2008 Predictions... just for the hell of it.

[AuH2O]

So "realistic" that everyone picks their own side to win...

[AuH2O]

Well, there's a good chance the Democrats will lose Minnesota in 2008, insofar as Bush came close this time and there's a possibility Pawlenty will be on the ticket.

[AuH2O]

Bayh/Clark vs Romney/Frist

Having both running mates being Southerners would be pretty cool.  I imagine Bayh and Clark would do better than Kerry/Edwards in the South and in poorer and rural areas.  Bayh being from Indiana would also be a great asset.  Romney would lose his homestate and probably everywhere else in the North.



Bayh/Clark - 389
Romney/Frist - 149

Key:
Light red/orange - Dem wins by 3% or less
Dark red - Dem wins by 20% or more
Light blue - Rep wins by 3% or less
Dark blue - Rep wins by 20% or more

no

[AuH2O]

Bayh isn't THAT moderate. We're not talking about a Breaux or Nelson here... he would lose Kentucky by 15, Virginia, Arkansas, Missouri, Arizona handily, and probably Colorado.

And, actually, I think Bayh would lose a lot more than that-- he's very dull, got to where he is because of his name (not that that stopped W. but he has more personality). He's a potential landslide victim in the making.

[AuH2O]

Name a Democratic candidate you think would do good. All your predictions are so super-partisan I don't know why I should keep listening to them.

Do you honestly think someone like Frist would have the edge over Bayh? Do you think Bayh would lose Vermont?

a) at least I predicted who would win the election (and my popular vote guess was 1% off)-- not to mention getting only 1 Senate race wrong and calling some tough House races very well too. And, yeah, actually Bayh could lose Vermont, and about 48 other states. No one's lost 50 so I'll give him the benefit of the doubt.

b) maybe Bayh would have an edge over Frist, probably not-- they're very similar really. But the GOP isn't going to run Frist. Sure, Bayh would beat Don King, but Don King isn't going to be the nominee either so it's a moot point.

c) I've said numerous times Hillary would beat a weak GOP candidate, and that Bredesen has some potential. Ed Rendell would seriously worry me. Truth is, the Democrats have a weak bench because they've done poorly in Governor's races, and when they've won it hasn't been with Presidential material. They also have fewer Senators, and of course only some of them are legitimate options, and even then Senators usually lose.


note: my analysis factors in what a potential nominee will have to do in the Democratic Primary. Moderates are seriously weakened because of it, which is one reason I don't think much of Bayh's chances.. he'll turn into a flip-flopping robot, sort of like a Gore-Kerry combo. Or, for Democrats, "uh-oh."

[AuH2O]

Are you actually saying Hillary is a better candidate than Bayh?

Yes. I'm not sure it's even close.

Why Democrats underestimate Hillary, I have no idea. They must understand she wants to be President, and they must understand she is a terrific politician.

I'd rather face her than Rendell but she's highly underrated.

[AuH2O]

AuH20, were you calling Bill Clinton a bad candidate back in 1992?

I was, what, 8? I remember election night, humorously enough. We were in Disney World, I was already a Republican though in hindsight I don't like Bush Sr. CNN called it for Clinton and I asked my dad who he voted for, assuming Bush, so I was mad when he said (in a resigned voice) 'Clinton.' But then my mom was like "but you told me to vote for Perot!" So I was mad but the scene was funny.

On the topic, don't kid yourself: Evan Bayh is no Bill Clinton. Neither is Bredesen or Warner or Richardson, for that matter, but that's because there is only one, just like there's only one Reagan. At least the GOP has a couple Governors with glimmers of greatness. The Dems just need some competence.

[AuH2O]

AuH20, were you calling Bill Clinton a bad candidate back in 1992?

On the topic, don't kid yourself: Evan Bayh is no Bill Clinton. Neither is Bredesen or Warner or Richardson, for that matter, but that's because there is only one, just like there's only one Reagan. At least the GOP has a couple Governors with glimmers of greatness. The Dems just need some competence.

I wasnt comparing any of the 2008 potentials to Bill Clinton.  I wanted to see if you would shoot him down as a bad candidate too.

Who are on your list of good candidates,  Democrat and Republican?

I'm still working on my first charts for both parties, with my view of their odds of nomination and then grades on overall strength. The GOP one is almost done but it has to add up to 100%, so a few corrections still to be made.

Short lists, stratified-
GOP:

Sanford
Pawlenty
Allen

Huckabee
Johanns
Kyl

Romney
Santorum
Ehrlich

DNC:

Rendell
Bredesen

Clinton
Richardson

Cantwell
Biden


note: I have a better handle on the GOP so my Dem thoughts are preliminary, I'll have more in a week or two. Bredesen is probably a paper tiger but I'll take him seriously for now, at least until I've looked into him.

[AuH2O]

Nick, thanks for posting Sanford's SOTS.

On charisma: it's kind of a tough thing to judge. Allen at first doesn't seem too great, but everyone seems to like him. You could make the same argument in favor of Bayh, but I'm more sure he just doesn't have it.

The thing I like about Sanford and Pawlenty is that they are so well rounded... their wives are both assets (professionals that worked, one a lawyer one an investment banker I think, but then cut back and are raising kids- both attractive), they are young & smart, reformers, did better than expected in their elections to Governor, etc.