Tyler Cowen, following Dan Drezner, offers his thoughts on who is likely to be elected President in 2008. (A completely different question, of course, than who you think should be President.) Unusually, I not only disagree with all of Tyler’s conclusions, but also his reasoning. But it did remind me that all the internets are waiting on tenterhooks for my own handicapping of the race. So, without further ado, the Democrats:
- Hillary Clinton. The presumptive front-runner, although with obvious baggage. And no, her husband doesn’t count as a liability; he’s a masterful political strategist, a great campaigner, and extremely well-liked, as Al Gore would have realized in 2000 if his own political instincts were more highly developed than those of a mole rat. But Hillary herself is not a great strategist, is only a competent campaigner, and isn’t all that well-liked. Republicans would unite against her in a general election to an unprecedented degree. Overall, her skill set is much better attuned to being a Senator than a President, or a Presidential candidate. And she is a woman; overt sexism might not be the issue, but in the general election the Republicans will make sure that every misogynist stereotype is in constant media rotation. But she might win; she has the money, a great team, and the real Hillary-haters are a vocal minority, not a true majority. Tyler says that Americans are tired of dynasties, which I would find more persuasive if they stopped electing them.
- Barack Obama. Longtime readers know that I am down with Obama. He is the real deal: smart, committed, charismatic, and sincere. He doesn’t have much experience in national politics, but that’s not nearly the liability in a Presidential campaign that many make it out to be. He was unambiguously against the war in Iraq, which — contrary to the stale wisdom that foreign policy always favors Republicans — will be a big vote-getter. People really don’t like the war, and they will vote on the issue, and it will favor any Democrat who has the wit to take advantage. On the other hand, he is black. We live in a racist country, and there are plenty of people who will vote on that basis, even if they don’t tell pollsters. And his middle name is “Hussein,” which Fox news will never ever let you forget. The only reason why these aren’t deal-breakers is the hope that they only apply to people who would never vote for a Democrat in the first place; but that might be wishful thinking.
- John Edwards. A very plausible sleeper candidate, who would be a comfortable front-runner in an ordinary year without the Clinton/Obama celebrity factor to deal with. Gained invaluable experience during the Kerry campaign — hopefully, learning some difficult lessons about what not to do. Accrued serious points among primary voters by admitting he was wrong about the Iraq war (in stark contrast to Hillary), and has an actual substantive message about poverty. Comes across as too artificial and slick, which can be a big disadvantage, especially to Democratic candidates; also, a relatively weak debater, as was evident in his matchup against
VoldemortCheney. Originally, the primary calendar was tuned almost precisely to his advantage; now, with California and other big states moving up, money will be more important, which won’t help him. Definitely in third right now, but a come-from-behind victory isn’t out of the question. - Someone else. None of the people actually running has a chance, although Bill Richardson is intriguing. Wesley Clark might have been an interesting possibility, but the top three are already sucking up all the oxygen, and it’s basically too late to jump in at this point (less than 20 months before the election!).
And the Republicans:
- John McCain. The formerly-presumptive frontrunner who has somehow frittered away his status. The McCain aura was always a bit of a mystery; despite being reliably conservative on most issues, he was able to pick and choose a public stance here and there to burnish his image as a “maverick.” So much so that some (crazy) Democrats wanted him on their ticket in 2000. But it’s no mystery why he isn’t running away with the primary race; over the last few years he has embarked on a single-minded campaign to completely undermine his hard-earned reputation as an independent-minded straight shooter. Where he used to stand up to the religious right, now he curries their favor, although he does so with such awkwardness that nobody is really fooled. And he has become the biggest supporter of the Iraq war outside the White House and the Connecticut for Lieberman party. McCain has managed to transform himself from a figure who was widely respected, even by people who didn’t agree with him, into someone who nobody trusts. Nevertheless, given the weakness of the rest of the Republican field, he still might back into the nomination.
- Rudy Giuliani. The fact that Rudy Giuliani is currently leading in Republican polls, and that smart people occasionally opine that he could win the election or even be a good President, is a source of unlimited amazement to me. Yes, he gave a couple of stirring speeches after 9/11. Something tells me that this will not be enough to overcome his penchant for dressing in drag, his support for funding abortions for poor women (always a winner among Republican primary voters), and the fact that he is hated by firefighters, by New Yorkers, and by his own kids. He’s already lost his own campaign book, and is weighed down by his association with Bernard Kerik. Personality-wise, he’s a thin-skinned autocrat who can’t handle criticism — something that, I’m taken to understand, occasionally comes your way during a Presidential campaign. If Rudy Giuliani wins the 2008 general election, I promise to never again make a political prediction in public for the rest of my life.
- Mitt Romney. Oh yeah, a pro-choice pro-gay-rights pro-gun-control Mormon from Massachusetts is exactly what Republican primary voters in South Carolina are looking for. His chances look good in the Utah primary, though. Why are we even talking about this? Of course, Romney has conveniently changed his positions on nearly every hot-button social issue since he shifted his sights from the Massachusetts governor’s mansion to the White House. It won’t help.
- Someone else. Unlike on the Democratic side, it seems completely plausible that a latecomer could swoop in to change the complexion of the Republican race. The names being bandied about thus far, however — Fred Thompson? Newt Gingrich? — aren’t inspiring anyone. But this field is not yet set in stone, and there’s plenty of room for intrigue to come.
And the winner is: I don’t know. The Democratic primary race is too close to call, but I’ll be happy to predict that whoever wins it will waltz into the White House. On the Democratic side: three solid contenders. On the Republican side: a cross-dressing autocrat, a New England Mormon, and an old guy whose entire schtick is sincerity but who has abandoned all pretence of having any. All of whom are running on the legacy of one of the least popular Presidents in history. Are you kidding me? Not since 1976 (post-Watergate) have Democratic chances looked this good this far before the election.
But, since there’s no accountability in this game, I’ll go ahead and translate my gut feelings into a quantitative prediction for the chances to become President in 2008: Obama 35%, Clinton 30%, Edwards 15%, McCain 10%, any other Republican 10%. Subject to change without notice. It’s early, but I’m happy to think that there’s a better than even chance that our next President will either be a woman or an African-American. Either would be a watershed moment in our history, something of which we could (quite belatedly) be proud.
The Democratic primary race is too close to call, but I’ll happy to predict that whoever wins it will waltz into the White House. On the Democratic side: three solid contenders. On the Republican side: a cross-dressing autocrat, a New England Mormon, and an old guy whose entire schtick is sincerity but who has abandoned all pretence of having any.
Sean, I wish I could agree with the above assessment — and I might, were it not for a well-known previous data point involving an inarticulate, draft-dodging, cocaine-snorting, drunk-driving, recovering-alcoholic former cheerleader and failed oil executive.
McCain had my respect until he started kissing some conservative ***.
I’m all about the Obama fever. And I wish Dennis Kucinich had *way* more support, coz he looks like he is a good candidate as well.
Obama sounds to much like Osama,
(not to mention Hussein)
Given the propensity for both major parties to kowtow to their own core special interests and support the scientific community only as a matter of convenience, I am overwhelmed by feelings of not giving a crap.
Still, Sean’s analysis is sound 🙂
Great post, except it ignores practically every public opinion poll I’ve seen. I think this is more wishful thinking than anything.
Check last week’s US News, about the electibility of Hillary, the (supposed) Democratic frontrunner. Against three Republican contenders, McCain, Giuliani and Romney, she only is ahead of Romney (of the three, the LEAST likely nominee) at this point.
Perhaps you have some two loop results from the opinion poll RGE’s you’re not sharing?
Predicting the outcome of a Presidential race just by plugging in the results of opinion polls taken more than a year before the election is neither fun nor especially accurate.
I’m with Scott, looks like once again the Democrats are trying their best to find a truly unelectable candidate, so I would not rule out any Republican.
I don’t think it’s fair to say that Fred Thomspon isn’t inspiring anyone. National Review came out in support of him almost as soon as he suggested he might think about running, and I know that many of my center-right friends are positively enthused by how careful and non-ideological he appears to be. I think that if he enters he could quickly become the frontrunner, even though he has no natural base… He’s also from a border state, and would probably do quite well in the midwest purple states.
I have a hunch Gen. Wesley Clark will play a big role before it’s over.
Gore?
Yes, I realize it’s nominally been ruled out, but he could honestly jump in at any point in the next, oh, nine months and have a credible shot at the nomination. I mean, it’s kind of like worrying about killer asteroids or super volcanoes–extremely unlikely, but a huge deal if it happens.
Barack Obama is not the antiwar candidate. He recently spoke before AIPAC in NYC. He pledged his allegiance to the state of Israel. This is mandatory for any serious presidential candidate. Like every other Democaratic front runner eager to please the Isareli lobby ,Barack Obama has indicated that he would be willing to attack-nuke?-Iran.
Why do you think he is so smart?
Barack Obama is just another egomaniac lusting for power.
And who are these racists that you mentioned in you post?
Barack Obama is just another sleazy politician. His oppostion to the war not unambigous. This has been well documented over at counterpunch.
Do you like Obama’s support for open borders immigration. It makes a mockery of the idea of economic equality. Barack Obama ,corporate whore that he is, will make sure that the greedy cheating class will get an unlimited supply of immigrant scab labor.
“Predicting the outcome of a Presidential race just by plugging in the results of opinion polls taken more than a year before the election is neither fun nor especially accurate. ”
This is certainly true, and the pole numbers will no doubt change dramatically before the whole thing is over. I was just pointing out that there’s no real reason to expect that any Democrat will win, when they are running neck and neck with the least likely Republican candidate. In this respect, this post is more wishful thinking than anything else.
And would you still be so happy to have a woman minority president if it was Condoleeza Rice?
So the USA, an advanced country of 300 million, is left to choose from these 6 for the office of the president.
Hillary – a far left-wing Senator with no accomplishment to speak of, even as a Senator. Hasn’t run anything larger than a senatorial office.
Obama – a young black American Senator who can talk, but don’t have a clue about the world.
Edwards – a dim wit has been
McCain – an old worrier who made a lot of noise the past decade but, what has he done, and what can he do anymore?
Guiliani – ex-NYC mayor who can lead and can run big things for sure, but an enigma to the country
Romney – who?
Let’s see, American elected Bush II, ex-governor with a passable education, dedicated to his mission of God to rid of world of evils. He charged into the scene and proceeded to pissed off a Earth population of 6 billion, borrowed $6T and call it wealth, a self-proclaimed worrier and defender of western civilization but can’t run a minor war, less win it.
America now has the above 6 candidates to lead into the future, to clean up Bush II mess. The newly minted US dollar coin should inscribe “God saves America.”
Questions from an alien. Why isn’t Jeb Bush considered a serious candidate? Is he interested in running this year?
Ijon,
Jeb has decided (wisely so) not to run. His brother’s abysmal record would not help him.
Sean,
At this point in the race, I think your analysis is pretty solid. I’m an Obama fan too. I am cautiously “hopeful”. But to use an analogy I am certain you will relate to…. Your odds at this point are “pre-flop.”
Elliot
How about these people? (For those of you who find this shocking: Sacha Baron-Cohen, who plays Borat, is Jewish himself).
drunk: I can assure you that Hillary is not far left, except when you’re looking from the far right.
In the infinite inflationary universe they all win somewhere 🙂
Dinsdale, I’m sure you’re right but I don’t have an amusing youtube clip for that.
Count Iblis, somewhere in the quantum multi-verse even you and I will be president in 2008.
Given that we haven’t had an actual Presidential election (one that was free from GOP manipulation and rigged/hacked voting) since 1996, why would any of this matter for 2008?? This even assumes we will have an election in 2008, which, if the US happens to be engaged in a nuclear war with Iran, might be highly questionable.
Physicists should like Wesley Clark. In the last campaign he said:
“We need to look at the realms of applied and higher mathematics. I still believe in E = mc squared. But I can’t believe that in all of human history, we’ll never ever be able to go beyond the speed of light to reach where we want to go. I happen to believe that mankind can do it. I’ve argued with physicists about it. I’ve argued with best friends about it. I just have to believe it. It’s my only faith-based initiative.”
He was ridiculed for that remark, but we can conclude two things from it:
1. He talks to physicists.
2. He doesn’t like faith-based initiatives.
I heard an interesting statistic recently, that no presidential candidate from the US Senate has won the presidency since Lyndon Johnson in 1964. Maybe we can break the spell this time?
I am quite happy California will have more of a say in the early part of the process now.
The perfumed Prince-this how the late Colonel Robert Hackworth referred to General Clark-come very close to starting a nuclear WW3 in the Ballkans. Clark wanted to bomb the Russians who at this point in time were our allies. The highest ranking British General in the Balkans told Clark that he was insane and was risking WW3.
Mrs Clinton’s husband- a well known war criminal -nearly started WW3, when the stealth bombers he ordered to bomb the Serbian population mistakenly bombed the Chinese embassy.
do you think any of us would be here having this discusssion if the Chinese ever bombed a US embassy.I think we all know.
the answer to this question.
The Democratic party, like the Republican party, is the party of death and destruction.
Dinsdale, we get your point. Which is nowhere near the topic of the post, so please desist.
Sean, if you check out the Connecticut for Lieberman party, you will find they do not support the escalation or the war in Iraq. This is because no one joined the party after it was created to give Joe a second shot at retaining his Senate seat. So then a local Humanities Professor registered as chairman of the party and has been holding meetings discussing anti-Iraq war policy. I am thoroughly ashamed to call Lieberman my junior senate…Bleck!