Michigan Primary predictions

[deep]

[maycocksean]

Originally posted by deep

[Infinity]

Ron Paul

Barack Obama

[phillyfan26]

Originally posted by Infinitum98
Ron Paul

Barack Obama

The only Dem on the ticket is Hilary in Michigan.

[Liesje]

Originally posted by Infinitum98

Barack Obama

lol...not

[2861U2]

Originally posted by Infinitum98
Ron Paul

You really think Ron Paul comes in first? Didn't you think he would also win Iowa and NH?

[Infinity]

Originally posted by phillyfan26


The only Dem on the ticket is Hilary in Michigan.

Oh, I didn't know that. I guess my prediction is Hillary.

[Infinity]

Originally posted by 2861U2


You really think Ron Paul comes in first? Didn't you think he would also win Iowa and NH?

Yup.

[phillyfan26]

Originally posted by Infinitum98


Oh, I didn't know that. I guess my prediction is Hillary.

Mine as well.

[Axver]

Originally posted by phillyfan26
The only Dem on the ticket is Hilary in Michigan.

Why's that?

[yolland]

Michigan is one of several states being punished by both national parties, but (in their case) more harshly so by the Dems, for having unilaterally bumped up their primary dates against the national parties' wishes. MI's GOP has been stripped of half its delegates to the nominating convention, and the Democrats of all of theirs (though some doubt the national parties will follow through with those threats). The national Democratic party also pressured their candidates to withdraw from MI's ballot and not campaign there, though Kucinich, Gravel and to a lesser extent Clinton (who stayed on the ballot but hasn't campaigned) have not complied. Essentially, this was a rebellion on the states' part against the entrenched lockhold of Iowa and New Hampshire on setting the tenor for the primary race every time.

[melon]

Originally posted by yolland
Essentially, this was a rebellion on the states' part against the entrenched lockhold of Iowa and New Hampshire on setting the tenor for the primary race every time.

Damn straight. I will be showing up to vote in it just for this reason alone.

[2861U2]

I'll wait until I see some current polls before I make a prediction, but I assume it's basically a McCain/Romney fight.

[Infinity]

Originally posted by yolland
Essentially, this was a rebellion on the states' part against the entrenched lockhold of Iowa and New Hampshire on setting the tenor for the primary race every time.

Can someone explain to me why Iowa and New Hampshire have so much power in every Presidential election. Shouldn't all 50 states have equal power? Why can't we strip down this whole complicated delegates and electoral system and make it a simple popular vote system? One popular vote for all the Republicans for the whole country to choose the Republican candidate. One for the Democrats and then one for the general election. I think that would be much more fair.

[Liesje]

Some states almost always go the same direction. Michigan is a "swing" state (typically quite close, can go GOP or Dem). Iowa and NH are also swing states. It probably also has to do with the Electoral College and what's at stake depending on which states you will automatically win and which swing states you can pick up.

Like melon, I plan to vote.

[Lila64]

So if Obama and other candidates aren't officially on the ballot, can they be written in? How will that work? Or will Hillary automatically win for the Dems because she is on the ballot?

[namkcuR]

The thing is, the DNC is punishing Michigan for the unsanctioned date by not seating any of their delegates at the convention, so Michigan has no effect on the Democratic race, even if Hillary recieves 100% of the vote.

At least that's my understanding of it.

[Lila64]

I hate to sound stupid, but here goes. Does anyone have a list of dates of when the rest of the country votes? I believe Calif (my state) is 2/5 I know the booklet/sample ballot thing is on my dining room table, just haven't looked at it yet

[Strongbow]

Originally posted by 2861U2
I'll wait until I see some current polls before I make a prediction, but I assume it's basically a McCain/Romney fight.

This is the latest poll for Michigan taken 01/06 - 01/07 BEFORE the New Hampshire primary on 01/08. The Poll was done by Rossman Group.


Huckabee 23%
Romney 22%
McCain 18%
Giuliani 8%
Thompson 4%
Paul 3%



McCain's victory in New Hampshire should bump him up into the lead, although it will probably be a smaller margin than it was in New Hampshire. 2nd plus for McCain is the fact that the Democrats are not having their primary so independents will be free to flock to McCain given that Obama won't be around. Huckabee will fade a bit but I'm sure Romney will fight hard here and some are already calling this Romney's last stand.

[yolland]

Originally posted by Lila64
So if Obama and other candidates aren't officially on the ballot, can they be written in? How will that work? Or will Hillary automatically win for the Dems because she is on the ballot?

No write-ins allowed, but there will be an "Uncommitted" option, which many are encouraging Obama and Edwards supporters to use. Nonetheless Hillary will obviously "win," though what exactly that'll amount to without delegates (assuming the national party follows through on that threat) is anyone's guess.

Originally posted by Lila64
Does anyone have a list of dates of when the rest of the country votes?

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_..._to_February_4

Originally posted by Infinitum98
Can someone explain to me why Iowa and New Hampshire have so much power in every Presidential election. Shouldn't all 50 states have equal power? Why can't we strip down this whole complicated delegates and electoral system and make it a simple popular vote system? One popular vote for all the Republicans for the whole country to choose the Republican candidate. One for the Democrats and then one for the general election. I think that would be much more fair.

Saving time and money, is what the usual justifications for maintaining the current system boil down to. States like Iowa and New Hampshire are relatively cheap to campaign in, and candidates don't have to scramble quite as wildly (and expensively) from one state to another as they would if all states were up for grabs at once. The current system does suck, but it really is difficult to come up with an alternative that wouldn't require candidates to possess more time and money than most of them do.