Loading ...« Yet another reason to love Mike Gravel | Home | McCain at CPAC »
Post-Super Tuesday Analysis
By rawhide | February 8, 2008
Democrats:
The winner of Tuesday’s Democratic contest was whoever won California – and that was Hillary. Hillary needed a big win to stop Obama’s momentum, and by essentially reaching a draw with Obama on Super Tuesday, California served as the tie-breaker to give Hillary the win. The next three Democratic contests take place Saturday, in Washington, Louisiana and Nebraska. Hillary is running a TV ad in Nebraska featuring Bob Kerrey, so that has to help. However, Nebraska is a caucus, and those have been kind to Obama thus far. One would think that Louisiana’s demographics would favor Obama. I have no idea how Washington breaks down. Maine is on February 10, and Hillary has done well in the Northeast. Next Tuesday, February 12, Virginia, Maryland and D.C. hold their primaries. There is no question how D.C. will vote, and Maryland likely will follow. Hillary needs to win Virginia to prevent an Obama sweep.
Hillary is running short on money, but the Clintons will always have access to money when they need it, whether it be from China, Saudi Arabia, or some other influence-purchaser. Obama is raising money like no one ever has before, and those donations will continue to come if he can regain momentum. After Wisconsin and Hawaii on February 19, there is a lull until Texas and Ohio on March 4. If Hillary can win both, she is back in command. If she splits, or worse for her, Obama wins both, it’s a completely different race. Pennsylvania on April 22 is the last delegate-rich state, and if there isn’t a winner by then, it’s on to convention.
I finally am convinced that the Democrats will go all the way to convention, which could provide the first suspense since Reagan and Ford battled to Kansas City in 1976. I think that Hillary will have a slight delegate lead heading into convention, and let’s face it: If 100 super delegates were going to be the difference, wouldn’t you bet on Bill and Hillary winning a majority?
Republicans:
The race for the Republican nomination effectively ended with McCain’s big wins on Tuesday, a fact acknowledged by Romney’s quick drop-out. Huckabee will stay in, but he’s just trying to keep his profile high as he preens for vice president. McCain likes Huckabee, because Huckabee has shown a lot of respect for McCain’s war service. However, I can’t bring myself to believe that McCain will pick Huckabee. McCain has never gone with conventional wisdom; why would he start now?
My short list for vice president: Huckabee, Governor Tim Pawlenty (Minnesota), Governor Charlie Crist (Florida), Rep. Marsha Blackburn (Tennessee), and Senator Joe Lieberman (Connecticut). McCain is a maverick, so I fully expect some names to be rumored that I would have never expected. I have predicted Pawlenty for a long time, and I’m not changing my mind. I’ve said all along that the two battlegrounds this election (outside of Ohio) will be the Southwest (Arizona, New Mexico, Nevada, Colorado) and the upper Midwest (Minnesota, Wisconsin, Iowa). McCain comes from the Southwest, and his immigration views will help with the Hispanics to hopefully keep all of those states in our column. That means that we need to pick up Minnesota and Wisconsin and keep Iowa to offset losing Ohio (which we will still be competitive in). Pawlenty was re-elected narrowly in 2006, but he has done a good job. He also was the first governor to endorse McCain, which I’m sure hasn’t been forgotten. I am expecting a McCain-Pawlenty ticket.
If I were McCain, I would consider using a different strategy when it came to announcing the vice president. The tradition has been to announce somewhere in the four weeks prior to convention. With the Democrats looking at taking their contest all the way to late August, McCain could either a) announce his running mate now or b) wait until convention, to provide some suspense of his own. If he announces now, it gives him a second person to campaign against the two Democrats, and I think that it would show unity and vision: We are ready to lead, and they are still bickering. The negative is that running mates usually fade quickly, and whoever it is could be forgotten before mid-summer. By waiting, McCain would reserve himself a media and poll bump. If the Democrats are headed to convention, they might apply the Reagan strategy for 1976 and announce running mates before their arrival in Denver. I think this is unlikely, since they will need to run together at that point to save the party. However, if the blood gets bad, and that always seems to happen when a Clinton is involved, there might be no salvaging a Clinton-Obama relationship. By waiting, McCain could let the others pick their running mates, and then announce his, maybe immediately following the Democratic convention (the media hype would be a good story to counter the Democrats dominating the news). We’ll have to wait and see.
History:
The Republicans always nominate the person next in line. That was proven again this week. In 1976, it was Ford’s turn; Reagan was runner-up. In 1980, Reagan; Bush was runner-up. In 1988, Bush; Dole was runner-up. 1996, Dole. 2000, George W; McCain was runner-up. Now McCain; Romney was runner-up. I think Romney is wise to drop out now before he embarrassed himself. If he’s smart, he’ll do like Reagan, and spend the next four to eight years advocating conservative principles. By spending some long hours in the movement, Mitt will finally win the forgiveness of conservatives for his prior flip-flops. Should McCain lose, Romney has history on his side in 2012.
The Democrats rarely nominate the frontrunner. 1968, McCarthy and Kennedy the frontrunners; Humphrey nominated. 1972, Muskie the frontrunner; McGovern nominated. In 1976, there was no clear frontrunner, but certainly not Jimmy Carter; Carter nominated. In 1984, Gary Hart the frontrunner; Mondale nominated. 1988, Hart again and Gephardt the frontrunners; Dukakis nominated. 1992, Bill Clinton came out of nowhere to get nominated. In 2004, Dean the frontrunner; Kerry nominated. 2000 was the only election that the frontrunner was nominated, and even then, Gore faced a spirited challenged from Bill Bradley.
I say all this to say: If history repeats itself for the Democrats like it did this week for the Republicans, Hillary is in trouble. She has been the frontrunner, and Democrats don’t like those. However, she has something that none of those others I mentioned had, and that is a husband who was president of the United States, and a machine that has connections and influence everywhere. The Clintons don’t lose; they destroy, and survive. When it comes down to it, they will do whatever it takes to get Hillary the nomination. They’ll be as careful as possible, because they know that winning in November is more difficult if they wage all-out war on Obama. But if it looks like he is close, they will stop him.
Prediction:
Hillary-Bayh meets McCain-Pawlenty in November.
Topics: Presidential Primary |
February 8th, 2008 at 8:52 am
Pawlenty join the ticket? He says categorically that he won’t run:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KeFyAd1sDAs
February 8th, 2008 at 12:35 pm
McCain/Pawlenty 08!!!! Lets order the bumper stickers now.
February 8th, 2008 at 1:12 pm
Bad call on Hillary being winner…she was clearly a loser on super Tuesday, b.c. I’m sure the Obama campaign didn’t think they’d win the most delegates, but, they wanted to make it close enough that Hill didn’t gain any traction as she continues to slip. As close as it was, Obama was definetely the winner.
Also, Huckabee surprised proving that a strong group of Republican voters believe in his message. Who would’ve really predicted 5 states for Huck, and that he was within one point of winning another?
I can see some sense to your thoughts on McCain picking a VP, although I doubt he will announce it until he is the nominee and Huckabee is out, if he decides to announce sooner rather than later.
March 19th, 2008 at 7:41 pm
Nice site!