Kos does well predicting the NC and Indiana primaries.--
Actual Results: Clinton by 2% in Indiana and Obama by 14% in NC.
Here are Kos's predictions:
Indiana:
Clinton: 51.1 percent
Obama: 48.9 percent
(Clinton +2.2)
North Carolina:
Obama: 56.1 percent
Clinton: 43.9 percent
(Obama +12.2)
blech.
Yep. Zogby did well, though he had Obama up by 2% in Indiana.
A RINO vs a guy who's never even so much as led a Boy Scout Troop?
I didn't want McCain to win the nomination, but I have no doubt people would be equally cynical if any of the other candidates had won. (I liked Thompson)
The exception, of course, is Obama, but that's only because he TRANSCENDS mere politics!
Obama's base has narrowed to just rich white liberals, nearly all blacks and young people.
The Reagan Dems have almost totally abandoned Obama and they are openly telling pollsters they will vote McCain in the fall.
Rich white liberals, nearly all blacks and young people will allow you to squeak into the Dem nomination, but do not make up anything close to a majority of the general electorate. This is a return to the minority coalition assembled by the Dems in 72, 80, 84 and 88.
Bill Clinton brought back many of the Reagan Dems in the 90s, but the 2008 Dem uncivil war may have driven them away all over again.
Truman-Dewey and Stevenson-Eisenhower were awfully good nominees I thought. And in terms of choice, Carter and Reagan were certainly a choice and not an echo.
count me among the cynical--these are three turkeys, one of whom will be elected president of the US in November barring some major unforseen developments (perhaps McCain could talk Hillary into running as his VP, for example--how would that change the caluculus?)
I do not expect over half of Hilary voters to go McCain as they are threatening, but Obama has had a problem attracting the Reagan Dems for months now in head to head polling against McCain.
Back in February, the Reagan Dems were undecided but leaning towards McCain.
By April, the Reagan Dems were making their decisions and breaking for McCain.
Indeed, it is questionable whether the Reagan Dems ever supported Obama.
The usual pattern is that the Dem candidate enjoys a large nominal lead in the polling this early in the cycle and that lead largely or completely disappears as fall approaches. Obama is in the unenviable position of being behind in the spring and being in the unenviable position of having to woo his own base to stay viable.
Put this in your prediction book. Obama will win and have a spectacularly unsuccessful presidency. Assuming he is renominated, he will be swept aside by Bobby Jindal.
Within the margin of error, no doubt.
Exactly 30-- Truman and Eisenhower were a bit before my time.
Bart: Polling aside, the fundamentals are awful for the Republicans. An unpopular war and an economy in the tank will translate into a defeat for the incumbent party in the fall.
The Dems are the incumbent party. Mr. Bush is not running again and the swing voters do not link McCain with Bush. Take a look at the Democracy Corps polling concerning this question to which I linked in my last post.
I expect the Dems to make solid gains in the Senate and keep its slim majority in the House. But, I am having a very hard time seeing Obama winning more than 45-47% of the vote this fall, perhaps closer if the conservatives stay home on McCain. I just do not see from where Obama gets the votes to assemble a majority.
A primary is a race in which two members of the same party are running against each other, being voted on by a self-selected subsample of the voting populace at large.
A general election -- two candidates from two different parties, each being voted on by an entirely different self-selected sample.
But a passionate vote counts the same as a lukewarm or hold-my-nose vote. McCain will win because he will have more votes in the key states, even though Obama's voters will be much more disappointed by his loss than McCain's voters would be by his defeat.
One citizen, one vote.