It has been a few days since the New Hampshire Primaries, and in the spirit of not knocking Wyoming, let's recognize Romney's 67% to the rest of the field's 34% vote get in the caucuses there. It ultimately doesn't matter because nobody knew about it, but he did slaughter everyone in the first contest out west. I still have some thoughts on what took place in New Hampshire, so as in my post on the Iowa caucuses, let's break it down by parties:
Democrats
The good: Hmm...this is tough. I guess that Obama was close and Bill Richardson dropped out and John Edwards was a very, very distant third. There's not a lot here that I like, except for the Edwards bit. That's actually a big deal as he's the biggest populist of the bunch and he's not someone I'd like the Democrats to have for their candidate. Really, I'm playing a game of "which Democrat do I want for president" because the fact of the matter is that the Republicans are going to have a tough go of it this fall no matter who the nominee is (except perhaps Ronald Reagan's corpse. If they wheeled him out, I think he could run the table) and so I want the most palatable Democratic candidate. As such, I love Edwards' loss and I don't like the return of Hillary.
The bad: Obama lost. It seemed like such a forgone conclusion that he would run the table after his surprise win in Iowa. One thing to remember is that there are a lot of states left and still a long run ahead, but this could swing Big Mo back in Hillary's favor. We'll see what Michigan and South Carolina bring.
The Republicans
The good and the bad: McCain won! That's my guy! I would love to see him take the crown, but the GOP field is completely up in the air. You've got 3 winners, none with a ton of momentum (seriously, Huckabee can spin 3rd place in a lot of ways, but it's not a win) and it's not going to be decided for a while. I could see Romney move to drop out if McCain wins Michigan, but I think Huckabee has the edge in South Carolina. Bush beat McCain there and then ran the table in 2000, and the same thing could happen again. It really depends on if McCain's rise from a blown up campaign after Romney took his nose dive is enough to overcome the home field advantage that a Southern preacher/Governor like Huckabee has. Mark my words, if McCain can pull out Michigan and South Carolina, he'll be the nominee. If he wins South Carolina only, I still give him the edge. If it's Romney/Huckabee as the two winners, who knows what will happen. If Romney comes back from the edge, he might be able to run the table too. The one thing I know won't happen is a Huckabee win in Michigan. You can take that prediction to the bank.
4 comments:
My thoughts are on my blog, but I definitely don't see Huckabee having a chance in the actual election, should he become the nominee. I think Republicans should be rooting/voting for McCain if they want a chance.
I think that even with McCain they don't have much of a chance, but I do agree that he probably gives them the best chance of winning.
Sorro,
If you're a libertarian then why do you want McCain? Is it the electability factor?
Rob,
It's not as much electability as it is his stands on some issues. I know that if you were to say who the most pure libertarian candidate is, you'd probably say Ron Paul. He advertises himself as such and he is, but just to a degree. Ultimately what prevents me from supporting him is his positions on 2 key issues: immigration and foreign policy. He'd shut us behind our borders and never leave again. I think that's misguided and his belief that we ought to boot out all the illegals shows a fundamental misunderstanding of the US economy and the impact that would have.
I like McCain's positions on both of those and would indeed go even further on immigration and I like his crusade against government waste. He may not be the perfect candidate, but no one is. He is the best of the bunch though in my opinion, even if he doesn't completely fit in my perfect candidate slot of my candidate decision matrix.
Post a Comment