PredictionsMock2008 Dem Presidential Primary Predictions - Liberalrocks (D-CA) ResultsPolls
Note: The Google advertisement links below may advocate political positions that this site does not endorse.
Date of Prediction: 2008-03-01 Version:10

Prediction Map
Liberalrocks MapPrediction Key

Confidence Map
Liberalrocks MapConfidence Key

Prediction States Won
26 |
52 |

Confidence States Won
26 |
52 |

No Analysis Entered

Prediction History
Prediction Graph

Comments History - show

Version History

Member Comments
 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-03-01 @ 23:08:13
OH is a tossup, as is Pennsylvania. Indiana is way off - its at least lean Obama. I wouldn't rate any remaining state as strong Clinton.prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-03-02 @ 22:36:57
This would be my map, Ill rate it anyway I see fit.

Thank you for the comment
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-03-03 @ 14:03:17
This would be my map, Ill rate it anyway I see fit. I would need to see more polling closer to the Indiana primary to make a decision there.

Thank you for your five cents
prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-03-04 @ 18:15:01
Is that 5 cents due to inflation, living in the state, or having the highest score on this site? =P

Or am I just 3 cents better than normal?

Last Edit: 2008-03-04 @ 18:18:27
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-03-04 @ 20:52:00
I dont care what your opinion is or your score on this site.
I also dont care about your well being.

Flat OUT

Last Edit: 2008-03-04 @ 20:55:22
prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-04 @ 21:32:49
Funny Stuff people!
Hang in there Liberalrocks!
I'm with you!
Bottom line is who really cares about Indiana anyway - you'd have to go a very long way back to find their last vote for Democrat as President.
Thinking 60's.
I mean it's so relevant to the state of play.
Certainly not a state that is like to fall into the all supremely powerful Obama's column if he is so blessed to win the nomination.
I'd be happy to see it.
The drought there's gotta break sometime.
prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-04 @ 21:33:35
Just about everywhere else in the North East has seen the light & changed from Republican to Democrat.
Come on Indiana you can do it!
prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-04 @ 21:34:17
I use the term North East liberally as I know they like to & act more Mid West.prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-03-04 @ 22:07:04
Thanks demboy! you help cheer me up,
I'm with Hillary all the way!! a strong woman
with a record for "change"
I loved her ever since 1992.
She has won my heart and my head.

Last Edit: 2008-03-04 @ 22:07:41
prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-03-04 @ 22:15:43
Thanks for the encouragement for Indiana, dem. Obama won my head before he won my heart.prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-04 @ 22:37:51
Watching Indiana, Virginia, & North Carolina go Democrat in the general election would get the biggest cheers from me!
I've never understood why they have been so steadfastly Republican.
They are not Hickville & should not vote as such.

prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-04 @ 22:38:31
Starting to think with these turn outs anything is possible.
Might even seen Georgia & Texas come back on over - now that would be shocking!
prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-04 @ 22:41:17
Is it not just me but I think McCain sounds & acts tired.
As much as I do like him, being independent, relatvely moderate (although not nearly enough), an admirable war record, & a rebel, I think youth may win out against him.
To me he does not come accross as passionate enough, he speaks well, but does not sound well.
Anyway as we all know words are not everything.
I think his undoing will be the 100 years in Iraq comment.
Not popular at all.
Stay out of the Middle East kids - it's not worth it.
You'll never solve it.
It's like Europe's fascination with invading Russia - just doesn't work.
prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-03-05 @ 00:01:19
dem, if you want the Dems to have a real crack at those states, you should be for Obama!

Like Clinton & Obama, you and I agree much more often than we disagree. I.e. agree with your comments on McCain.
prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-05 @ 00:26:58
It's true & I agree with Obama's comments about what binds us together is stronger than what divides us - which is not just an American thing but also relevant for the whole world.
He certainly does do better in the smaller states.
I'm amazed at Hillary's strength in the larger states though.
Their biggest fault I think is that they have neglected the smaller states - & hence the lead in delegates.
Every state counts!
It's no good just sending Bill everywhere, she needs to put in personal appearances.
She may not have won these states but I'm sure the margins would have been closer.
If it's any consolation Win my oldest brother is a massive Obama fan - all over his facebook.
Naturally I try to plug Hill there where I can.
I have to say though the Republicans could have done alot worse than McCain - he will be formidable enough no doubt.
However I'm feeling shades of Bob Dole all over again.
prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-05 @ 00:28:41
I think but Hill & Barack should try & stay on the high road.
There's no need to get personal & nasty.
Keep it nice.
Negativity is ok as long as it's constructive & factual.
prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-03-05 @ 00:59:42
This contest is going to get REALLY nasty now :/

The only ones gaining here are the GOP...
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-03-05 @ 13:57:31
Looks like I didnt do too bad on my predictions last night. The only one I have missed thus far is that damn Wisconsin.
Bunch of cheeseheads lol
prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-03-05 @ 17:03:06
I dunno who. Who gives a hoot what McCain has to say when there are exciting Democratic races going on? Perhaps Obama gets a needed dose of humility, and will go on to accept a place as Clinton's running mate? Now if its gets too nasty, some of the supers are going to come out against the offender. So maybe supers aren't such a bad idea after all. prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-08 @ 23:35:17
Obama definitely needed a dose of humility.
It's a good trait!
prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-03-09 @ 04:57:12
The novelty of the race is going to run out if they run the clock to the point where they have less than 3 full months to campaign against McCain. That's what I'm more worried about :/prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-03-09 @ 05:16:28
Well if it destroys the kid so be it.
I can deal with Big MC if Hill doesnt get it.
prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-03-09 @ 05:19:50
"Well if it destroys the kid so be it.
I can deal with Big MC if Hill doesnt get it."

Can I take this to mean that you care more about destroying Barack Obama than retaking the White House from the Bushies? That really is crazy talk...
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-03-09 @ 05:21:55
yes you most certaintly can. Hope the wife goes down with him she's a real bit*h too. As I have stated before if HILLARY is not the nominee I WILL VOTE MC CAIN.

Last Edit: 2008-03-09 @ 05:32:33
prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-09 @ 06:42:53
I have to say I almost feel the same way.
I'm totally shocked with some of the comments Michelle Obama has come out with.
The media has focused on Bill's antics, but I'm afraid she has been much worse.
I'm all for Girl Power but she has the mouth the size of Texas.
Can't believe she hasn't got more heat for it.

prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-09 @ 06:48:13
Exhibit A from the Michelle Obama hall of fame
"If she can't sort out her own house then she's not fit to be President"
Exhibit B
"If Hillary was at the top of the ticket I would have to seriously think about voting Democrat"
or something like that.
I mean come on.
If Bill said the same things you would have never heard the end of it.
She is a bitch.
prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-09 @ 06:49:04
I'm sure she's a nice person in her own way but she needs to put a leash on that mouth of hers.prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-03-09 @ 16:07:59
Some of the things you guys are saying in this page about Obama's wife and wanting to destroy him over retaking the White House are pretty shocking too, guys.

I don't find it that surprising that a former-President gets more media coverage than Obama's wife. Especially with some of the flat out silly things he was saying back in South Carolina.

prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-09 @ 23:56:44
They are both spouses & they should both be examined for what they say.
I don't want to see anyone destroyed but at the same time I think what she has said makes her look like a bitch.
In today's language I'm afraid that's not really very strong words.
Going on what she says I'd be concerned about her role as First Lady.
She is not at all concillatory.
Oh & I forgot Exhibit C
"I've only started feeling proud in America" (now that her husband is winning in her opinion)
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-03-10 @ 00:01:28
Michelle has been downright nasty in this campaign however it doesnt get covered due to the fact that a former president is envolved. Now Bill has put is foot in his mouth a number of times yes, But this woman has said some downright hateful things about the clintons that dont get any press Double Standard. Her past is also very alarming to me, she's arrogant pompous and yes a BITCh there I said it. She makes Teresa Heinz Kerry look like a kitty cat. Research it why dont ya,prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-10 @ 00:03:34
Nastee with a capital N.
prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-03-10 @ 00:12:26
Who, these two are just like two girls gossiping. The fact is that Obama will be the Democratic nominee. Hillary and Michelle can have a catfight all I care.

Most who care to know know that Clinton cannot overcome Obama's lead. Once it becomes clear to the average Joe, as early as April 23 or as late as June, the supers will be getting on board, no one will listen to Hillary anymore, and Barack can concentrate on the general election.
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-03-10 @ 00:14:14
The republicans can concentrate on his "decorated" past lol lol lol lol.prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-10 @ 00:15:32
Call it gossip for all I care.
The facts are the facts.
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-03-10 @ 00:37:47
You go boy ! Like it or not the first lady or first spouse will be under a huge amount of scruntiny in a general election campaign. If the bitch cant keep her mouth shut in the primaries what's she gonna be in a general election. You thought Hillary got a lot of heat in 1992 just wait if Michelle is given the spot light, dont think her mouth and past beliefs will go over real well with old ladies in the midwest but again this is all "gossip" These types of images DO sway voters as silly as it may sound. Obama or any democrat could not afford to lose any female vote.

Last Edit: 2008-03-10 @ 00:46:03
prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-03-10 @ 01:45:39
She can overcome his delegate lead, but only with the overwhelming help of Superdelegates, Michigan and Florida, and a number of other factors. Her path to victory exists, but it isn't the most likely path to occur.

If she wins, it will likely be on the convention floor.
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-03-10 @ 13:31:28
LOL I may be wrong on this, but my gut tells me that wingindy and whoblitzell are the same commenter. They always appear to be commenting at the same time virtually right after each other, its nice that there both from indiana one happens to be an independent the other a democrat? They both happen to be commenting at the same time early in the am on Saturday when it was midnightt to 1 am here in California which would have made it what time in indiana lol. Yet they both happen to be on at the same time in those wee hours now thats a coincidence? Well like I said I could be wrong but I would bet on it.prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-03-10 @ 14:36:52
That is so silly I'm not even sure how to respond to it. Wing and I agree because great minds think alike :Pprediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-03-10 @ 14:39:43
How true. You are in Bloomington, who? Isn't there a big Obama group there?prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-03-10 @ 14:51:57
I rest my case lol. 1436 and 1439 time reads on last two responses gee what another coincidence both responding again at the same exact time! lol come on,

Last Edit: 2008-03-10 @ 14:54:41
prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-03-10 @ 16:01:12
Interesting... Liberal you do very good undercover work... lol... Maybe whoblitzel could then answer my questions, that I posed to wingindy and do a comparison for me of the records of Sen. Obama and JFK, whom they claim him to be "the next." Maybe I could also have some insight as to the "superior judgement" Mr. Obama posses for his oppostion to the war and subsequent funding of the war. I would also be interested to know if whoblitzel supported Mr. Kerry and Mr. Edwards in 2004, seeing that they too voted for the war as Mrs. Clinton did. I would also like to know an approximate and appropriate time frame for punishing Hillary Clinton before she can be considered a viable presidential candidate?

In regards to whoblitzel's comments I agree that it will be nearly impossible for Mrs. Clinton to overtake Mr. Obama in the delegate lead. But with that said, if MI and FL revote in roughly the same manner they did earlier, along with PA, KY, WV, and IN voting w/ an average of +10% Clinton, as Ohio did (less in IN, greater in WV and KY), it is very conceivable that by June, when all the states are done voting, Mrs. Clinton will have a lead of 250,000 or greater in the popular vote but a loss of 50-75 delegates. It will be interesting to see the superdelegates act as the 2000 Supreme Court in deciding this election. Either way the dem party is headed for a battle and it isn't likely to be an "equal or fair" decision based on the outcome to 50% of Democrats.
prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-03-10 @ 17:22:19
I don't think Obama is the new JFK, I think that JFK was the old Obama. Obama > JFK and he will be a much better President.

I would say he had superior judgment because he didn't support the war as a shallow political calculation, which is what most of the Senate did in October 2002 (aside from 23 that did vote against it).

In 2004, I was largely behind Wes Clark or Howard Dean's candidacy. When Kerry got the nomination, I considered voting for him after he admitted his Iraq war vote was a mistake. But in the end, I decided that if he were sincere about it he would propose a clear position for ending the war -- he did not.

While Senator Clinton has proposed such plans, they are always vague and she has not made amends for her vote or admitted that it was a mistake. Dodging this subject shows to me that she is not ready in terms of judgment, strength, or experience to bring about the change that this country needs. She seems to me to be little more than a politician.

It's hard to explain. But I believe in Obama, that he can change the country. I don't feel that way about Hillary Clinton and I'm too young to remember when her husband ran for office in 1992. I was too young to vote in 2000, but I supported Nader's candidacy over Gore.

I don't believe this will end on the convention floor. Hillary's path to victory does not seem to be an overwhelmingly likely one. For one, if Michigan and Florida DO revote it will NOT benefit her all that greatly in terms of delegates.

Consider that 60% of delegates would go to her from Michigan's 156 if the old results were reinstated. NONE would go to Obama, since he wasn't on the ballot. If Michigan revotes on terms of a primary, then she can at best hope to win there maybe 55-45 and net 13-15 delegates over Obama.

Same with Florida, really. Consider they hold a new primary in Florida. Obama this time gets 40-45% of the vote, whereas last time he got 33% (this is because Edwards wouldn't be on any new ballot of course).

Or consider that they revote. Hillary loses one of these states. She is forced out of the race, as her argument of winning big states and battleground states has been ripped to shreds.

Even if they don't revote, I don't see the old results being reinstated. If the delegations are seated without a revote (I suspect they will be) it will likely be only AFTER the race has been decided because of superdelegates intervening and/or one candidate conceding. And of course, there is always the option to not seat them at all. If the states and Hillary are unwilling to compromise, this is a possible outcome. I doubt the rules committee will let Hillary steal it with a last minute rule change.

As I've said before, she has a chance.. but it isn't a very good one.

Last Edit: 2008-03-10 @ 17:29:34
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-03-10 @ 17:35:50
Now I know that wingindy's response is going to be similiar but at least try to reword it a little bit so its not so transparent lol.prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-03-10 @ 17:59:38
whoblitzel- Okay, that is a better explanation that wingindy can offer. Thank you for giving me a direct response. You have much more style and offer more substance than wingindy.

Now, Do you believe it was in good judgement for Mr. Obama to speak against the war in 2002, state "I don't know how I would have voted" in 2004 and then vote for funding the war during his tenure in the Senate. Do you see any possible political ploy in his frist address being to his liberal Chicago district and his 2004 assertion being to the entire state of IL? Do you think that by voting to not fund the war, Mr. Kucinich had better judgement? Do you believe that Mr. Obama shows good judgement in his handling of the war in Afghanistan and the leaving open the possibility of striking Pakistan? Out of curiosity, do you know the differences in Mr. Obama's exit strategy and Mrs. Clinton's?

You are very correct that a revote in MI and FL will not serve to benefit Mrs. Clinton in regards to delegates. As is, with the MI "unpledgeds" going to Obama, the NY Times reported that reinstating MI and FL would add 64 delegates to Mrs. Clinton. Finally do you remember election 2000? Hypothetically speaking, what should the superdelegates do in a situation where neither candidate has the 2025 delegates to win the nomination, but Mrs. Clinton has 250,000+ more raw votes and Mr. Obama has 50-75 more pledged delegates?
prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-03-10 @ 20:23:59
I think HIllary would re win Florida with close to 60% of the vote.
The demographics here are much more friendly to her candidacy - big Hispanic vote, elderley, working class, & gays & lesbians.
In regards to Michigan I believe she would win again but it would definitely be closer - around 55%
Hillary is going to win comfortably in Pennsylvania, West Virginia, & Kentucky - basing this on previous wins in Ohio, New York, New Jersey, Arkansas & Tennessee which are close fits to these 2 states eg Tennessee & Arkansas are similar to Kentucky & WV, Ohio/NY/NJ is PA.
She will come out in the popular vote simply because there are more people in the states that vote for her.
I believe she is on track to win with the support of the Supers.
Obama will be offered the VP position whether he likes it or not.
That's my gut could be wrong but that's how I feel at the moment.
But it certainly has been one big see saw of a ride.
Very enjoyable & nerve racking, especially enjoyable if Hillary wins!
prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-03-11 @ 04:45:25
I think opposing the war in any capacity is good judgment, because agreeing with George W. Bush's failed policies is certainly not. Obama certainly shouldn't have voted to continue funding the war in my view, but I can see the argument being made that it is needed to keep supplies going to the frontlines until such time that the war can end (i.e. we get Flubya out of office). Certainly, Dennis had better judgment on moral grounds to oppose the war. The statement that he would attack Pakistan was largely in the frame of reference of actionable intelligence, not a declaration that he wished to goto war. Ruling something like that out categorically isn't wise. If Al-qaeda is in Pakistan, we should strike against their compounds. I have little respect for the lives of terrorists.

As for specific differences in their withdrawal plans, I believe it is certain that they are nearly identical. Hillary and Obama would both start pulling guys out in the first 100 days, for example. They would both end the war of course. I think even McCain will be forced to, in the end, if he were to become President by some twist of fortune.

The war will end in my view because certain political realities within and outside of Iraq will force it to end. I do not believe that the ideal Bush expressed can or ever will exist in the Middle East.

So why do I support Obama more on Iraq? Well, it's basically a matter of trust. Hillary voted for the war, never admitted it was a mistake, and even now will not apologize or cede an inch. A sign of strength, I suppose. But also of stubbornness. In a way, not at all dissimilar to George W. Bush. Needless to say, they very fact that the comparison can be made bothers me a great deal.

Well, assuming that the Hillary 250k advantage came from the NEW results in Michigan and Florida she would certainly have a legitimate claim to the nomination. But in the end, this is only a moral claim... as delegates and not votes elect candidates.

Therein is the conundrum. If this unfortunate scenario arises, I think the superdelegates should go with the candidate that has the greater margin of victory. If for instance Obama has a 120 pledged delegate lead and Hillary has perhaps 150,000 or so votes, then that would be Obama because 150,000 votes out of 30+ million is a very small percent... whereas 120 delegates out of 4000 is a more significant margin.

I doubt this outcome is very likely, though. I think it would be resolved far before the convention floor.
prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-03-11 @ 11:10:54
How do you think this is going to be resolved before the convention? Do you think that MI and FL will not be seated? Obama will probably reach his max in pledged delegates tonight, after MS, unless there is a tremendous gaffe made by Clinton. Now, whoblitzel, speculate with me for a moment!

1. Obama has +150 (on the high end, but giving Obama the advantage) delegates.

2. By NY Times estimates MI and FL add 60-65 to Clinton, that takes him to roughly +90 (again, giving Obama the edge).

3. If PA votes as OH did, Clinton could add 10-15+ delegates (but, again lets give Obama an edge) taking him to +80.

4. OR and NC are essentially tied, but might tighten again if Clinton wins PA as she did OH. Again lets give Obama the advantage and add 20 delegates to his total, assuming he wins by 10% in both states bringing him back to +100.

5. He does face some VERY rough territory in KY and WV, but not as rough in IN, judging by numbers in southern Ohio, but lets say that he ties IN and only losses by 15-20% in WV and KY, (the latest from WV polls), which would add roughly 15-20 delegates to Clinton, so Obama would be around +85. (again, lets give Obama the advantage)

6.) We then go on to PR, where Clinton has a VERY strong advantage, but lets say she only gets a net gain of 10 delegates, bringing Obama to +75 delegates.

Now, I think his numbers could be as low as +50, but he will always hold a delegate advantage. And lets use your number of +150,000 raw votes for Clinton, though it could be much higher if she does well in FL, PA, KY and WV and can keep NC w/ in 10%. What exactly is the will of the people? More intended to vote for delegates to support Clinton, but those pledged delegates are going to Obama? Is that just a "moral" victory? Isn't that a clear victory? Didn't 500,000 more people vote with the intention of Al Gore being president in 2000? Clealy neither candidate will have the 2025 to claim a victory w/out the help of the superdelegates. So if more people intended to vote for Clinton, but their delegates went to Obama, what should the Superdelegates do? Did the Supreme Court make the correct decision to supress the votes in Florida in 2000?

Last Edit: 2008-03-11 @ 11:12:54
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-03-11 @ 13:32:40
Agreed.prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-03-11 @ 15:54:07
I don't believe the situation you are describing can or will happen. First of all, the projections made by NYT are the crux of that math for Hillary.

But the old results will not stand. There will probably not be a revote. The way I see this ending in all honesty is that the DNC agrees to seat the delegations and in such a manner that it has no effect on the race (such as the candidates splitting the delegates 50/50 or something similar). The other problem with NYT article is that it assumes Obama gets 0 delegates out of Michigan, which isn't going to be part of any compromise.

She will not get within 50-70 pledged delegates of Obama. As such, she will probably not win unless she can make some other moral case to superdelegates, which is extremely unlikely. Hillary cannot win without Michigan and Florida and winning both by good margins -- in terms of delegates or popular votes. It is also purely possible that the punishment stands and that Florida and Michigan are not seated in any capacity. In this case, Hillary cannot win.

Last Edit: 2008-03-11 @ 15:54:49
prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-03-11 @ 16:02:58
NO, you are incorrect the NYT article gave all the "Unpledged" vote delegates and Kucinich votes to Obama, and assumed a 55-44 vote for Clinton.

I agree that Hillary will never catch up in delegates, but if she can hold her numbers in MI and FL (which according to Howard Dean, must do something to seat their delegates, but not at DNC expense) she will come w/ in 50-75 delegates of Obama. Holding her numbers in FL, where Obama is NOT popular, will NOT be a problem and after OH and PA both go for Clinton, MI will follow suit. And it is true that MI and FL could be punished but what does that say to the state of FL, that has been so critical in the last two elections? Isn't a bit demeaning that delegates from Guam and Puerto Rico will be seated, whose citizens can not vote for POTUS, but delegates of FL and MI will not be seated when they will be responsible for electing the POTUS.

But, if it is your opinion that MI and FL will be punished or that the delegates will be split 50/50, which ONLY the Obama camp supports that is your opinion. Do you not believe my scenario or do you not want to believe it?

Last Edit: 2008-03-11 @ 16:06:20
prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-03-11 @ 16:22:30
Again, what do you fear in having MI and FL revote? If Hillary can't catch up in pledged delegates, why should you be scared? Ah, yes you are scared of the fact she could win the popular vote!!!prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-03-11 @ 17:03:01
She will not be overcoming Obama's 800K lead in the popular vote, regardless of whether re-votes are scheduled in FL and MI. In fact, Obama stands a fair chance of winning in MI, where he currently polls dead even with HRC.prediction Map

 By: doniki80 (I-OH) 2008-03-11 @ 17:50:41
Again wingindy, you do nothing but LIE! Please at least make an attempt to get the facts straight.

RCP and CNN put Obama's lead w/out Florida and Michigan at 600,000. w/Florida his lead shrinks to 300,000. W/Florida and Michigan, Clinton has a lead of 20,000! And PA, which has more Dem voters than Ohio, hasn't even voted yet. Obama has a very slight lead in NC and OR. And Clinton has a huge lead in WV and I would assume KY, by the total vote count in Southern Ohio... But, if she can't surpass him in the popular vote, why are you affraid of a revote? You never answer my questions... What do you fear from FL and MI? Rasmussen also had a statistcal tie in Ohio before the Ohio vote, I should remind you, and of course Zogby had Obama ahead in Ohio! Isn't it obvious from election 2000 that the popular vote doesn't matter... Or does it just NOT matter when its convenient?

Last Edit: 2008-03-11 @ 17:52:04
prediction Map

 By: wingindy (I-IN) 2008-03-12 @ 00:17:40
The 600K lead does not include many caucuses that do not release popular vote totals, as the popular vote is not what the nominating contests are designed to produce - they are a means of delegate selection. If you want to use popular vote as a measure, you should count all popular votes. Extrapolate the results in caucuses in IA, NV, WA & ME, and Obama nets 110,000 votes. Texas caucus, 120,000. And now with a 90K margin in MS, and Obama's overall popular vote margin is closer to 900K.

If you want to include Florida, despite the fact that all candidates agreed with the party that it would not count, its 600K. You can't include a contest (MI) where not only did all agree it wouldn't count, but some candidates names were not on the ballot as a result of that agreement.

The popular vote could hypothetically matter as a talking point if one candidate were to hypothetically lead in the popular vote and not in the delegate count. As that looks highly unprobable, I doubt the issue will have to be addressed as a live issue.
prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-03-12 @ 03:14:26
Florida and Michigan as they stand now cannot be counted because the DNC has ruled their primaries illegal. As such, the party (and the superdelegates that are basically party insiders) will not recognize it.

It's really as simple as that. Then there is the fact that Obama wasn't even on the ballot in Michigan, and throwing Michigan in becomes a matter of flat out intellectual dishonesty.

I'm not sure what they will do about Florida and Michigan.
prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-05 @ 08:51:29
It's a complete joke.
But it seems you always have to have some sort of voting scandal in your election cycles - whether it's hanging chads, daddy's friends on the Supreme Court, unguarded electronic voting machines in Ohio, or voiding over 1 million voters in Michigan & Florida.
I'm not so sure it is the world's greatest democracy.
You should have kept the Westminster system if not the British.
prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-05 @ 08:52:53
I'm waiting for the cluster bombs after that last inflammatory post.
prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-07 @ 00:44:29
The goverors of Michigan and Florida chose to disenfranchise their own people and are now playing innocent.

I don't buy it.
prediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-07 @ 07:48:05
It's a strange outcome all round.

prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-07 @ 15:47:12
Yeahprediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-13 @ 02:15:15
I'll still think it's sad.
It was botched from the start & they should have just revoted with Obama on the ticket in Michigan, & campaigning.
I mean this whole process is so drawn out what's another 2 states?
The fact they are also amongst the largest 2 states in the nation, & are key battlegrounds is just ridiculous.
The Democrats need to make sure this does not happen again.
They go on & on about Bush, & 2000, & Ohio in 2004, but in my opinion this is just as bad.
Can anyone spell disenfranchisement?

prediction Map

 By: bonncaruso (D-DEU) 2008-04-19 @ 17:28:06
"I'm not so sure it is the world's greatest democracy."

Du solltest erst auf amerikanischem Boden leben bevor Du Dir solche Sprüche erlaubst. Schäme Dich, Junge, schäme Dich! Und ausgerechnet aus dem Mund eines Österreichers...
prediction Map

 By: whoblitzell (I-JPN) 2008-04-20 @ 01:14:51
Hillary kann nicht gewinnenprediction Map

 By: demboy73 (D-AUS) 2008-04-20 @ 04:55:11
Yes She Can!
prediction Map

 By: Liberalrocks (D-CA) 2008-04-30 @ 23:24:22
Im closing down this map version please move any comments over to my new version

Thank you
prediction Map

User's Predictions

Prediction Score States Percent Total Accuracy Ver #D Rank#Pred
P 2018 Senate 30/35 17/35 47/70 67.1% pie 5 0 334T483
P 2018 Governor 33/36 25/36 58/72 80.6% pie 3 2 56T372
P 2016 President 48/56 29/56 77/112 68.8% pie 14 0 369T678
P 2016 Senate 30/34 17/34 47/68 69.1% pie 7 0 213T362
P 2016 Governor 9/12 6/12 15/24 62.5% pie 5 0 47T279
P 2014 Senate 33/36 24/36 57/72 79.2% pie 60 0 82T382
P 2014 Governor 29/36 17/36 46/72 63.9% pie 53 0 123T300
P 2012 President 55/56 46/56 101/112 90.2% pie 97 1 77T760
P 2012 Senate 32/33 22/33 54/66 81.8% pie 48 0 40T343
P 2012 Governor 11/11 7/11 18/22 81.8% pie 12 0 24T228
P 2012 Rep Primary 44/52 26/52 70/104 67.3% pie 67 - 5T231
P 2010 Senate 34/37 25/37 59/74 79.7% pie 71 1 63T456
P 2010 Governor 35/37 21/37 56/74 75.7% pie 44 5 106T312
P 2008 President 51/56 42/56 93/112 83.0% pie 53 1 139T1,505
P 2008 Senate 31/33 15/33 46/66 69.7% pie 4 24 227T407
P 2008 Governor 8/11 5/11 13/22 59.1% pie 2 17 232T264
P 2008 Dem Primary 49/52 18/52 67/104 64.4% pie 24 - 23T271
P 2008 Rep Primary 33/49 16/49 49/98 50.0% pie 7 - 55T235
Aggregate Predictions 595/672 378/672 973/1344 72.4% pie

Back to 2008 Dem Presidential Primary Prediction Home - Predictions Home

Terms of Use - DCMA Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC 2019 All Rights Reserved