Who do you think will be the top three candidates from each party in the Iowa caucus and New Hampshire primary? This is the question posed in a contest put on by Pajamas Media here. After agonizing over my choices for at least thirty minutes, I finally gave up the attempt for the moment.
It's a hard call. In Iowa, I tend to think that Huckabee will beat off Mitt Romney and John McCain will come in third--though he, Thompson, and Giuliani are bunched fairly close together in most polls. (I wouldn't mind if Thompson were a little closer to the top tier; he seems to have substantive stances on a lot of answers, but his campaign doesn't seem to be very well run at this stage.)
Even if Huckabee wins in Iowa, I don't think he will win in New Hampshire. If Romney wins in Iowa, I think he most certainly will win in New Hampshire. However, if Huckabee wins in Iowa and John McCain moderately well, I think the Arizona senator, who's already surging in the polls, stands a chance of beating Romney in the former governor's home territory. So in New Hampshire I'm betting Romney will still hold off McCain by a slim margin, and Giuliani will follow in third. Perhaps Huckabee will pass Giuliani if he wins Iowa, but I have a hard time seeing his influence in Iowa and elsewhere (read the South and Midwest) translating into results in the Northeast.
As for the Dems, I have sinking feeling--maybe it's just a fear--that John Edwards will win in Iowa. He has all but lived there since the last Democratic primary. Hillary seems on defensive mode, even trying to downplay expectations according to one report. I think I go Edwards, Obama, Clinton in Iowa.
I think Edwards will win in Iowa but not in New Hampsire. If Clinton places third in Iowa, I think her hold on New Hampshire will fall as well, as there are plenty of people committed to Clinton just because they think she is the most electable. Iowa might show this assumption false. In New Hampsire it will be Obama in a fairly substantial win with Edwards and Clinton virtually tied.
Is anyone else willing to handicap the race?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
1 comment:
hmm... very insightful predictions, alyosha. and i'm glad that i'm not the only one talking about this election. :)
i agree with you on all accounts, even the sinking feeling. edwards, well, i might actually like him and listen to him more if i wasn't aware of the fact that he made his millions being one of those lawyers. my own lawyer had said to me how he had sought out 30 expert witnesses (other m.d.'s) who would find fault/wrong in his case, no one agreed with him. he went to the 31st one who agreed, and he won the case. my lawyer coined it as "intellectual dishonesty." i can't help but think that he's an expert lawyer who has a way with tugging at the heartstrings of average american/jury/what-have-you. along with that, the deepest suspicion (sort of confirmed) that he is not always honest and authentic... yeah, so that one scares me quite a bit. and because of your assessment, hillary's camp is fighting hard to topple obama because they feel like it's better to have edward win and come third in iowa, then to lose to obama because if he wins iowa, there's no stopping him. so they say.
yeah, i've been watching too many of these politico-pundit shows that most of these are regurgitation of media analysis.
in the end, you just never know. people just have to go out there to vote. and learn about their candidates. okay, this was a lengthy comment to say that i agree. ;)
btw, it's good to have you back online. :)
Post a Comment