People: Do You All Realize That IA And NH Are Both Terrible Predictors Of Who Gets Nominated?

[MannyGoldstein]

Awful.

NH generally votes for the least-phony candidate. I have no idea of what drives IA.

As far as I can tell, IA and NH rarely pick the ultimate nominee.

So don't despair when Clinton's flawless and unstoppable effort gets 70% of the votes in both places (as I was assured would happen several months ago). Your candidate still has good shot.

[Captain Hilts]

1. Was the dig against Clinton really necessary? She's not even my candidate! nt

[MannyGoldstein]

3. Actually, It Was Against The Local Hillophiles

Remember way back, say, 2-3 weeks ago when we had all of those "Resistance is Futile! Hillary has 80% of the vote - and it's going up!" posts?

[Captain Hilts]

4. ALL the candidates supporters are doing that. 'Cept for Richardson, Dodd's and Kucinich's. nt

[MannyGoldstein]

6. I Think Not nt

[DemocratSinceBirth]

14. Would It Be Fair To Conclude That If You

Would it be fair to conclude that if you can't provide a link to a thread started by a Clinton supporter that she would get seventy percent of the vote in Iowa and New Hampshire you are a liar?

[elleng]

2. Manny,

whatever their histories as predictors, I do think they serve an important purpose; they enable those of us who are interested to study the candidates in ways not available elsewhere.

In fact, more wouldn't hurt and might help.

[Kokonoe]

5. Bill Clinton won 3% in Iowa 1992

http://uspolitics.about.com/od/2008elections/tp/iowa_caucuses.htm

[slick8790]

8. Also, no one competed in Iowa since Tom Harkin, D-IA, was running that election.

Meaning it didn't matter who won.

[Kokonoe]

12. I was for Harkin

[iamjoy]

7. That's How It Used To Be

it used to be that Iowa and New Hampshire raised awareness, but didn't necessarily cement the nominee. But, with a compressed primary schedule and a media salivating to seem relevant, it really does look like whomever wins Iowa will be our nominee.

How many times have we heard/read that if Obama (or Edwards) doesn't win Iowa the campaign is basically over?

[slick8790]

9. I disagree.

They've been pretty on most of the time. Since 1972, their inception, they've been right 4 out of 7 times where the state was contested. 4 out of 6 if you don't count 1972 when the winner was "Uncomitted", and 4 out of 5 if you don't count 1992, when no one contested since Tom Harkin was running that year.

[BenDavid]

10. I kinda disagree. I think this time folks are not going to be

shopping around and picking someone they would like to have a beer with, because this is what the gop, rnc and the msm sold those folks in 2000 and thus begun this one big clusterfu*k we have now in this country. Yes, I support HRC and honestly believe by the 15th of February or at least by the 29th HRC will have a majority of delegates to become OUR nominee....

[cynthia]

13. How many delegates does a candidate have to get to have a lock on the nomination?

is there a link that shows how many each state has, how they are allocated by the results of the primary/caucus, and when the states have their primary/caucus?

[Yukari Yakumo]

15. The delegation size of Iowa is 56. NH is 30. Total needed to win the nom is 2184 {nt}

uguu

[onenote]

11. actually, NH and IA are not "terrible" predictors

Not perfect by any means, but far from "awful"

The Iowa caucus has been the first "primary" since 1972. Since that time, the leading vote getter in the caucus has ended up as the Democratic nominee five times (1980/Carter; 1984/Mondale; 1996/Clinton; 2000/Gore; 2004/Kerry). In 1976,"uncommitted" was the leading vote getter, but of the real, live candidates, the leading vote getter was the ultimate nominee, Carter (and his coming in "second" to uncommitted was a boost to his campaign).

The record in New Hampshire is similar: since 1972, the leading vote getter has ended up with the nomination six times (Carter/1976; Carter/1980; Dukakis/1988; Clinton/1996; Gore/2000; Kerry/2004).


Admittedly, a couple of those victories were by sitting presidents (although Carter was being seriously challenged). But it would be a mistake to dismiss these early votes out of hand. Among other things, they are covered much more by the media than before and thus have a greater impact on national trends and money than they did in the old days, which is why its signifcant that the last two elections, the winners in NH and IA have ended up with the nomination.

[Hippo_Tron]

16. That was before frontloading

2004 is a far more accurate picture of what 2008 will look like than any previous election cycle. Kerry won Iowa and it propelled him to the nomination because of the condensed schedule. I'm not saying that's guaranteed to happen to anybody this time but it's a likely scenario.