Decision ‘08

A Quick 2008 Snapshot

It’s clear to me that my old candidate profiles and odds are no longer operative, given the recent activity in the 2008 race. We’ve had some declare, some withdraw, and the odds have shifted. From where I sit, the quick view is this.

Two candidates, one Democrat and one Republican, hold the keys to this election. Each candidate is not a sure winner, but if either declares, their respective races will be thrown into turmoil overnight. I’m talking, of course, about Barack Obama and Rudy Giuliani.

Two establishment candidates are going to run, and they are going to be formidable. In this case, I refer to John McCain and Hillary Clinton.

On a slightly less-likely-to-win scale, there are several candidates who will make life interesting for the frontrunners, and who might possibly pull a dark horse upset. On the Democratic side, think of Al Gore and John Edwards. For the Republicans, Mitt Romney, Condi (though I don’t think she’ll run) and Mike Huckabee.

And there are a number of people who will run, either out of vanity or a desire to influence the debate, but who have no shot - none - of winning. These candidates include John Kerry, Newt Gingrich, Tom Vilsack, Joe Biden, and numerous others.

Over the next few weeks and months I’ll be revising my profiles and odds to reflect these new realities…

3 Responses to “A Quick 2008 Snapshot”

1 Aaron Says:
December 2nd, 2006 at 3:10 pm
Maybe it’s just me, but I put Biden and Vilsack over Edwards. I mean, the guy will have been out of public office for four years by ‘08 and he’s only been elected to any public office once (unlike Obama who was a state legislator for quite a while). He lost the VP debate to Dick Cheney, albeit not quite as badly as Quayle lost to Bentsen. And even SNL (which typically has at least a bit of a liberal slant) poked fun at his lack of substance: In a sketch when the Democratic candidates were explaining their strong points against then-front runner Howard Dean, Edwards said simply, “And I’m cute.” I don’t think that Biden or Vilsack will last as long as Clinton and Obama, but I think Edwards will be a first-round elimination, along with Chris Dodd and John Kerry. Vilsack has an advantage as he is the only real Washington outsider running, and Biden is the only candidate of whom I am aware on the Dem side who has actually made a substantive proposal for a plan of action in Iraq. Both are far more successful and experienced than Edwards.
2 Dan Says:
December 4th, 2006 at 1:18 pm
Still praying that Condi opens up to the idea, though I fear the talking heads would bring out their big guns. The more I read about her, the more impressed I am by her intelligence, humility, fearlessness, and down-to-earth charm. She’s been quoted as crediting her strong faith in God for daily guidance, and that means that the establishment Libs will deem her to be a radical fundamentalist (never mind that she’s a Presbyterian).
3 Patrick Says:
December 8th, 2006 at 2:39 pm
If Edwards - who was a nominee for Vice President and had one full term in the Senate - is criticized for a lack of experience, what will be said about Condi Rice should she run? While certainly intelligent and capable in her own right, this is a woman who has NO elected experience. She makes an excellent staff/cabinet member, but she has never even been elected dog catcher.

I do not believe for a moment she will run, because for one thing, she knows better. In the inevitable public vetting process, her positive attributes will wither against the drawbacks to a Rice candidacy. And while many people overlook it now, let us not forget that she was Bush’s National Security Advisor when all the worst mistakes were made in Iraq and while the public may not acknowledge it now, you can better believe that her Republican rivals will point it out in the primaries and if by some stroke of luck she gained the nomination, her Democratic opponent would be all over it in the general election.

Of the two bigshots on either side: McCain and Guiliani vs. Clinton and Obama, who are more or less even in polls (depending which ones you read) only McCain and Clinton have really been subjected to a deep and detailed public scrutiny over a long period of time. If they are thus even with candidates Guiliani and Obama, who have not yet been so scrutinized, I have to assume that as their little secrets come out, regardless of how comparitively minor, they can only lose support. Even if much of that support goes to other candidates on lower tiers, I am convinced that in such a crowded field that a candidate pulling a universal 30-40% (as McCain and Clinton are sure to do) would stand to get the nomination.