Super Tuesday Discussion Thread
I am setting this up to discuss the results of Super Tuesday as they are confirmed. Since the polls have been all over the place, I would suggest that we wait until a state has enough votes reported to give a reasonable idea of what is going on. After all, we’ve had months and months of speculation on what is happening today, we don’t need any more.
When good, dependable data arrives, please note it, the time that we got it and, if you like, your personal interpretation of that data.
As a base for conventional wisdom, here’s Newsweek’s predictions as of 5am Eastern time this morning:
Too close to call or not enough information:
California, Tennessee, Georgia, North Dakota, Montana. Total 351 delegates
McCain: 512–winner take all states of NY, NJ, DE, Connecticut and Arizona, plus proportional MN, AL, OK and IL. Probably MO, another winner-take-all, but that may not happen
Romney: 184–UT and MA by wide margins. CO, AK, WV
Huckabee: 34 from AR.
Ron Paul: 0
Play nice.
Tom Trumpinski
Comment by tet on 5 February 2008 at 2:12 pm:
3pm Eastern time, Tuesday:
The West Virginia Convention has pledged 18 delegates to Mike Huckabee. The first round of balloting was inconclusive. During the second round, Ron Paul was dropped due to a fourth-place finish and most of the McCain delegates defected to Mike Huckabee to give him the victory.
Conventional wisdom of a half-dozen pollsters had set this as a likely Romney victory.
On May 13th, an additional 9 delegates will be elected by popular vote in a primary and three of the delegates will be selected by the GOP leaders in WV.
Net totals versus expected:
Romney -18
Huckabee +18
Tom Trumpinski
Comment by J. Prescott on 5 February 2008 at 3:37 pm:
Here is something I have said rarely recently: Good idea tom.
A couple recent things about the Romney and Huckabee dynamic.
- Word has it that at the WV convention, McCain supporters jumped in and supported Huckabee once it was apparent McCain wouldn’t take the 18 delegates. So that was a little of the gamesmanship. Romney accused McCain of a shady backroom deal, everyone else said “isn’t this how close conventions work?”
- Huckabee went on, I believe Good Morning America, and took a shot at Romney for what Huckabee felt was an inappropriate proposition on Romney’s part. Namely, that Romney contacted Huckabee and asked him to drop out of the race because Huckabee was siphoning possible Romney votes. Huckabee, rightly, was pissed by the implication and went so far to say that “even if I weren’t running I don’t think most of my voters would go for Romney.” So depending on how long he stays in, I don’t think Huckabee is going to stay neutral after he drops out, nor do I think he is going to go towards Romney. I think there might be some personal animosity there.
- Interesting point about the assumption that if not for Huckabee, those voters would go for Romney, dealing with the Arrow Impossibility theorem and voting preferences here. Tom, I think you would be especially interested in the theorem, if you haven’t read it already. The post clouds how the primary would go down in a two man race, but it confuses in a really cool manner, so that is something.
http://www.realclearpolitics.com/horseraceblog/2008/02/on_mccains_voting_coalition_1.html
Comment by tet on 5 February 2008 at 4:06 pm:
Real interesting link, Prescott. Thanks.
Tom
Comment by thetodd on 5 February 2008 at 4:30 pm:
Do they cover Arrow’s theorem in a typical political science curriculum?
I think I learned about it during the 2000 elections from Slashdot (a tech news/discussion site I used to read a lot when I was at U of I).
Comment by J. Prescott on 5 February 2008 at 5:08 pm:
I first heard of Arrow in a polisci class, but they cover it in economics courses.
Comment by kofi the i prefer my nominee chosen by uncommitted super delegates on 5 February 2008 at 5:17 pm:
It would seem a running total would be more useful if you kept a running total as opposed to a running “net versus expected.”
Comment by Augur on 5 February 2008 at 5:31 pm:
Prediction: Huge night for Obama, lots of surprising strength for him. He very narrowly loses Cali b/c 25-30% of Cali voted before today, but splits or wins delegates
Comment by tet on 5 February 2008 at 5:33 pm:
No problemo, Kofi.
Huckabee 18.
You a /.er, Todd? I should have known. Did you get my email?
Augur, read the OP. No predictions in this thread, just facts and interpretations thereof. Polysci and economic theories like the AIT are also fair game.
Tom T.
Comment by J. Prescott on 5 February 2008 at 5:43 pm:
Well, anyway, lets do a running total from prior races:
McCain: 93
Romney: 77
Huckabee: 58
Paul: 4
Also, when polls close (in CT):
GA: 6
Conn., Ill., Mass., N.J., Del., Ala., Mo., Tenn., Okla., Tenn.: 7
AR: 7:30
AZ, CO, MN, NY: 8
CA: 9
MT: 10
AK: 10:30
Comment by tet on 5 February 2008 at 6:02 pm:
5:34pm Eastern (reported by Slate):
Ron Paul brokered a deal with Huckabee to pick up three of his eighteen delegates from the WV convention:
McCain 93
Romney 77
Huckabee 55
Paul 7
Tom
Comment by tet on 5 February 2008 at 6:07 pm:
7:08pm Eastern:
ABC declares Obama over Clinton in Georgia with 86 to 13 percent in exit polls.
Gotta go to supper–someone else divide up the delegates for me, please.
Tom
Comment by Augur on 5 February 2008 at 6:11 pm:
Here is some exit polling data
Second Wave Numbers
Alabama: Obama 60, Clinton 37
Arizona: Obama 51, Clinton 45
Arkansas: Clinton 72, Obama 26
Connecticut: Obama 53, Clinton 45
Delaware: Obama 56, Clinton 42
Georgia: Obama 75, Clinton 26
Illinois: Obama 70, Clinton 30
Massachusetts: Obama 50, Clinton 48
Missouri: Obama 50, Clinton 46
New Jersey: Obama 53, Clinton 47
New York: Clinton 56, Obama 43
Oklahoma: Clinton 61, Obama 31
Tennessee: Clinton 52, Obama 41.1
First Wave Numbers
California: Clinton 50, Obama 47
New Mexico: Obama 52, Clinton 47
Utah: Obama 61, Clinton 40
Comment by thetodd on 5 February 2008 at 6:41 pm:
I guess my niche here is prediction market data, so here’s what it is so far.
To win the GOP nomination, McCain has had roughly an 89%-11% lead on Romney all day long with some small fluctuations in both directions.
To win the Dem nomination, Hillary fluctuated between 52-54% throughout the morning. In the early afternoon, heavy betting on Obama started to come in, and Hillary’s odds were steadily driven down to just under 50%. As soon as results started to come in about 40 minutes ago, Obama quickly shot up to 60%, which is where he still stands right now.
Comment by J. Prescott on 5 February 2008 at 6:49 pm:
The problem with the democratic races with the delegates is that it is all proportional, so say in Georgia, where it is a blowout in the early going. I am confident that Obama is going to win, but the margin is already narrowing from Tom’s report to 59-35 on CNN. So in Georgia we might be able to call states in the democratic race, the percentages are too fluid.
Plus it doesn’t help that they called the Georgia race with less than 1% reporting.
Long story short, calling delegates for any democratic state is going to be a long coming.
Comment by J. Prescott on 5 February 2008 at 7:02 pm:
I have to add one complaint.
The polls in Illinois, Conneticut, and Massachusettes have just closed. CNN HAS ALREADY CALLED THESE STATES ON THE GOP SIDE. Illinois and Conneticut for McCain, and Romney (surprise) for Mass.
I refuse to recognize any of those states until SOME VOTES COME IN.
Comment by tet on 5 February 2008 at 7:04 pm:
I’m curious about something. I’m looking at the numbers of Obama voters in the exit polls in a number of states and they seem a lot higher than the predictions from the last week.
I wonder if moderate independent voters are casting votes for Obama because of his charisma or voting for him just to mess with Hillary. If this is the case, I am wondering how this will alter McCain’s numbers, since this is one group to whom he’s supposed to appeal.
Prescott’s right about the media “calling” states that are proportional. It’ll be a day or two, at least, before we really have any grasp of numbers for the Democrats, and even if one or the other of the two candidates got 100% of the delegates today, it would not be sufficient to give them the nomination.
Now, it’s interesting on the Republican side because there still are winner-take-all states–I know of NY, NJ, CT, AZ and MO. Are there any more that you can think of, Prescott?
In those states, even a tiny numerical victory is enough to give you the prize.
As far as calling states from exit polls, it’s burned us before, but only in places where it turned out to be really close races. I don’t know anyone who expected MA or IL to be a close race on the GOP side.
Tom
Comment by tet on 5 February 2008 at 7:20 pm:
Remember, too, that IL is a district-generated delegate state for the GOP. Those guys at the top of the ballot were only there for show–what was important is the delegates further down the ballot.
If it’s pure exit polling, the reports on Illinois don’t mean anything unless the voter knew what he or she was doing and the results are counted by district. That IL “win” is not as significant to McCain as New Jersey’s 52 WTA.
Tom
Comment by tet on 5 February 2008 at 7:29 pm:
Other GOP WTA:
DE 18
MT 25
ND 26
Utah 36
One thing to watch is the 50% of the popular vote mark. Arkansas and Tennessee add bonus delegates to the district proportions if a candidate goes over 50%of the popular vote.
Man, talk about a bunch of experimental voting laboratories…
Tom
Comment by tet on 5 February 2008 at 7:54 pm:
For Prescott, here’s the 8pm figures for current delegates won today.
Note that there are actual delegates won, not projections or exit polls:
Obama 30
Clinton 8
McCain 97
Huckabee 25
Romney 5
I’ll do hourly updates at 9 and 10.
Tom
Comment by tet on 5 February 2008 at 8:33 pm:
At 9:30 Eastern time, McCain was projected to win the NY WTA primary. This seems like a good time to make a summary of won delegates.
These are the current totals from before today, today’s projected from WTA states (GOP) plus won districts for proportional. Pledged Superdelegates are included in this total:
Republicans: Needed 1190
McCain 309
Romney 99
Huckabee 54
Paul 6
Democrats: Needed 2025
Clinton 279
Obama 210
Edwards 26
Back in an hour.
Tom
Comment by tet on 5 February 2008 at 9:41 pm:
Delegate count, 9:30 CDT.
Democrats–needed 2025
Clinton 299
Obama 225
Edwards 26
Republicans–needed 1191
McCain 332
Romney 135
Huckabee 54
Paul 6
To tell the truth, the major winner to me so far looks to be Mike Huckabee, who still appears to have a chance to take Missouri and who has far exceeded expectations elsewhere. While the conservatives in Georgia split their vote, across the rest of the south, they’ve been tilting heavily toward Huckabee.
I can’t really see how Romney can pull this out of the fire. I have to admit that I’m wrong about his chances. As a matter of fact, I think that if he cannot pull down a win in Missouri and at least 85 of the California delegates, he should consider dropping out and throwing his support to Huckabee.
Huck’s showing has really surprised me to tell the truth.
On the Democratic side, it’s pretty much what I expected–a toss-up so far.
Hopefully, things will be clearer in the morning.
Tom Trumpinski
Comment by Augur on 5 February 2008 at 10:52 pm:
Missouri is creeping to 49-48 with about 93% in. I wonder if Claire pulled it off. If so, I’m writing her a check. She’s really something. I <3 Hotpants McCaskill
Comment by Augur on 5 February 2008 at 10:58 pm:
Hillary did a B+ reading of a very well written speech tonight. It had a more populist theme than most of her messaging and it could have been a great moment if she was a slightly better communicator. Read her speech when it’s on her website, it isn’t up yet, but if you read it, and then you imagine it in her voice and then again in Obama’s voice, you’ll see what I mean.
Comment by J. Prescott on 6 February 2008 at 12:09 am:
Per CNN:
Delegates Projections at 11:31 CT(No Cali calculation)(Still some not added in from some states per Congressional District calculations)
McCain - 475 (716)
Romney - 151 (1040)
Huckabee - 105 (1086)
Clinton - 534 (1491)
Obama - 425 (1600)
Cali was called for McCain and Clinton.
Alright, thoughts.
I will not predict who will for Dems, although the consensus is (and the CNN commentators agree) the presumption that Hilary won NY, Cali and NJ saved her ass. Some people says that she won Super Tuesday, I don’t want to make that judgment, cause quite frankly, its not my race. However, it is close enough that both Obama and Hilary are going to have to go back to their fundraising well which could hobble them in the national. I don’t know if that will definately hurt them, but it is just another barrier.
As for the republicans, McCain is going to have an even greater lead at the end of the day. In the states Huckabee won, McCain only lost by a few % points, so he should be relatively close, while Romney falls back in all of those states. When McCain lost, it was generally in proporational states and he didn’t lose big. In California he is winning big over Romney and Huckabee (as of 11:30, 44% McCain, 25% Romney, 12% Huckabee). So by tomorrow, the delegate count could be 700+ for McCain (CNN has their roughest estimate at 754), putting him needing 400 more.
GOP Delegates available at dates:
1008. That means McCain will probably need to secure approximately 40% of all delegate. 99 of those delegates are Winner Take all (VA, DC, VT).
This race should be mostly over. But McCain can still blow it.
Ultimately, McCain will win and will win by the start of Spring. The dems won’t have their candidate by then. Hillary will win Texas, which is the largest state still up, and be real competitive in Pennsylvania and some of the others. I think the dems go to the convention, and it gets heated. I think that the race going to the convention means that there is no joint ticket.
Comment by Augur on 6 February 2008 at 8:27 am:
This is a pretty solid analysis of why going forward may favor Obamarama:
http://outsidereport.blogspot.com/2008/02/life-after-feb-6th-obama-has-edge.html#links
Comment by Augur responding to what Prescott is about to ask on 6 February 2008 at 10:57 am:
i think you the answer
is
you look at Real Clear Politics
and where he was
2 weeks ago
compared to today
in all the caucus states
plus he has a delegate lead
that wasn’t anticipated
no one would have expected he’d win Missouri
for instance
hillary had a stronger organization
in Mass, NY, and Cali
NJ, frankly i was surprised by
Also, big fundraising boost in January.
he exceeded expectations set a few weeks back by most pundits…
Comment by tet on 6 February 2008 at 11:08 am:
Current totals as of noon eastern time today:
Clinton 582
Obama 485
McCain 516
Romney 207
Huckabee 142
Paul 6
These totals do not include the California figures, which are very late.
Romney’s definitely out. Immigration is not as big an issue as I expected. He should toss his current delegates toward Huckabee and go home.
Question then for Prescott and BJ:
What are the issues that are bringing out the votes for McCain? He’s even winning the votes of anti-war Republicans that I expected to stay home or go to the Democrats where there was an open primary.
BTW, I finally figured out your politics, Prescott. I was having a hard time because I hadn’t gone far enough back. You’re a 1964-era Rockefeller Republican. BJ’s more of a Nixonian ends-justify-the-means Republican.
Tom
Comment by thetodd on 6 February 2008 at 11:29 am:
Prediction market update:
Obama’s surge (which coincided with the release of the first Georgia numbers) took him all the way up to 62% to win the nomination.
The next few hours were not kind to Obama, as he gradually fell all the way to 40%. However, he recovered and got back to about 46% by 4 AM Wednesday.
Right now, at 11:26 AM on Wednesday, it stands at 50/50. If this is where the dust settles, then, from the bettors’ perspective, Super Tuesday was a small victory for Obama, since his nomination win odds will have improved from ~47% to ~50%.
On the GOP side, McCain moved from 89% (Tuesday morning) to almost 95% (now).
Comment by J. Prescott on 6 February 2008 at 11:45 am:
Alright, a lot of different irons in the fire.
First, a useful money site. Its unfortunate its the New York Times, but its not bad.
http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/finances/index.html
AUGUR! GET OUT OF MY HEAD!
Seriously though, I question how much either party can claim momentum. Yes, Obama closed from polls to results, however, Clinton took the Democratic G-spots in a big way, including a Massachussettes primary without the support of the Kennedys. Obama won more states, but a few of those are states that no democrat is going to win in the general, i.e. Utah. Don’t get me wrong, I am not claiming that Hillary won the day either, I just think it was more of a draw, with little to no momentum coming out. I think fundraising may be a little of an issue, but with the states upcoming, Hillary does have some advantages that I think some Obama supporters are too quick to discount. In short, I think this race is going the distance, and I just wonder if it does go to the Convention whether the backgrounds the Clintons have in backroom deal making will win them the nomination.
Tom - Quickly with regards to my politics, were you referring to Nelson, cause I would have to disagree. I think I am much more fiscally conservative than Nelson, particularly on spending. I think where you and I have disagreed on this topic is that my stances have been more targeted to specific elements of the budget as opposed to just advocating wholesale cutting. Although I do think the government has a role in the economy, I am all for making that role only as large as necessary, and most of the programs the government has I think are unnecessary. If you would like further clarification, we can email or carry on this conversation in another arena.
As for the voters, and why they are coming out, I wonder if it is a combination of several factors. I saw that a lot of people who voted for McCain said that character was an issue. I wonder how much Bush is actually helping McCain because of his appearance as a conservative ideologue and whether Romney and the conservative talk show hosts were inadvertantly helping McCain. Specifically, Bush’s rep to 90% of the population going into office and during his term was that he toed the line with Republican principles and didn’t diverge from them. Whether that is true or not is another discussion, but that may be the appearance.
McCain’s perception as a Maverick gives him an advantage: get the general conservative mindset, without the man being enslaved to set of principles that could lead to crisis. That perceived flexibility after the rigidity of Bush is an advantage. And as the anti-war crowd is against Bush, he could pick up that vote. Romney, Limbaugh, et al saying that he wasn’t conservative enough reinforced that qualifty of flexibility people, even republicans, want. Huckabee is not tainted by this ideologue stigma cause he runs on his personality and personal views. So when people wanted to vote against McCain, they ran to Huckabee who was perceived as more conservative, but not as much as an ideologue as Romney.
I have nothing to back this up, this is all conjecture, but there might be something to it.
Comment by roy on 6 February 2008 at 1:16 pm:
Like JP this is total conjecture, but could it be that the anti-war republicans are looking to the future, rather than to the past?
I don’t see why they would vote in the democrat primary based on the war. Obama may have voted against it in the first place, but his and Clinton’s positions on ending it asap aren’t radically different, as far as I can tell.
On the republican side, things again tow the line; McCain and Romney are both adamant against timetables for withdrawal. I don’t think the apparent effects of the surge can be discounted. McCain was an early supporter, and death tolls dropped shortly after it was implemented. Whether or not that is because of the surge is another question, but to your average media educated voter, it certainly appears that way. So, in a choice between someone who early on supported an apparently working strategy, versus someone who wasn’t in a position to influence the policy…I suppose it comes down to whether the anti-war republicans are anti-war because of troop involvment, or troop casualties.
Comment by tet on 6 February 2008 at 2:25 pm:
As of 3pm Eastern time:
McCain 720
Romney 256
Huckabee 194
Paul 14
All others 7
Obama 838
Clinton 834
Edwards 26
About the best the anti-McCain forces can hope for is a brokered convention, and that’s not a very bright hope.
On the Democratic side, it’s going to come down to the superdelegates. As evenly as the two candidates are doing, the possibilty of a Clinton/Obama ticket looks more and more inviting to me, even if “political insiders” keep calling it impossible.
Question for Augur and Brian:
Can you think of any reason that Obama supporters would break for McCain if Clinton headed the ticket and he was VP?
Can you think of any reason that Clinton supporters would do the same if she put Barack on as VP?
Tom Trumpinski
Comment by J. Prescott on 6 February 2008 at 5:43 pm:
As of 5:42 CT
McCain: 697
Romney: 244
Huckabee: 187
Clinton: 1012
Obama: 933
Comment by Augur on 6 February 2008 at 8:09 pm:
There are hardly any hillary supporters who would bolt if she made barack the VP
however, there are 2 groups of barack supports that spring to mind who might support mccain instead of hil was on the ticket
1) hillary haters who think there is a strong chance obama will get shot
2) all the republicans (moderate, undeclared, and some declared) who are inspired by obama but really hate hillary clinton.
3) some republicans who strongly dislike McCain, but hate hillary
I used to think she wouldn’t pick obama b/c of the folly of picking a vp that overshadows the P. That was the basis for our bet.
Pundits are pressuring both of them to consider a joint ticket, but I think the ultimate question will be who adds most to the ticket - and while Obama would be a good add for Hillary, she might want the Governor of Ohio - to solidify the state, or depending on stats and his money, maybe Bayh to try to pick up Indiana. I think Warner in VA would be a great pickup, but I think the party wants him running for Senate. Also, Wes Clark wants the job. An argument might be made that Clark counteracts McCain’s strength on security. Also, maybe Richardson b/c he helps in the West and w/ Latinos and he’s incredibly experienced.
Another factor is how much she has to beat up on Obama to win, she might make that an impossibility if she cuts him up too brutally.
If I’m Obama I would go for someone like Chris Dodd, someone extremely experienced, and tough. Or perhaps Sebulius if there is an indication McCain is going to add a woman to his ticket (maybe even if not). Obama’s problem in a general will be how green he looks compared to McCain. Hillary’s experience intuitively seems more hollow than McCains. He seems tough and tested-Obamarama, as much as I love him, may not necessarily be either.
Comment by Augur on 6 February 2008 at 8:41 pm:
I will predict that Hillary will make Richard Holbrook her Sec of State
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Richard_Holbrooke
Comment by Augur on 6 February 2008 at 8:46 pm:
Good analysis from the politico. One important note on their 2nd factor - all of hillary’s strongholds but FLA were on Feb 5, but not all of obama’s strongholds
http://www.politico.com/news/stories/0208/8363.html
Comment by Hanno on 7 February 2008 at 11:55 am:
So Mitt just called it quits. *cough…looks at Tom* Republican nominee eh?
Comment by tet on 7 February 2008 at 2:08 pm:
Yep, Hanno, I was wrong. Just lost a chapter from my book, as a matter of fact. That’s always the danger when writing in a speculative manner.
Now the question is what happens next? I cannot believe that Romney would give those delegates to McCain, considering the animosity that’s been the case between the two of them.
I also notice that McCain carefully missed the Senate stimulus package vote even though he was in Washington at the time. Clever? Ends justify the means, I guess.
On to November and Hillary/Obama.
Tom Trumpinski
Comment by Anonymous on 7 February 2008 at 4:00 pm:
Romney seems like an opportunist, and if any of the GOPers look at actuarial tables, it’s Romney. He’d give Mac his delegates, a night with Ann, his Mormon soul, etc, if he could be the VP