Presidential Predictions

I do enjoy making political predictions, but can't claim to have a great track record. I think I somewhat accurately called the results of the 2006 election, and I knew (like everyone else) that 2004 was going to be a close one. I also remember confidently declaring a few days before the 2002 election that Tim Pawlenty would come in third in the three-way gubernatorial race in Minnesota. Gov. Pawlenty is currently serving is second term.

I was all but avoiding the presidential politics up to just a couple of months ago. Not having poured over polling data or anything like that, I still have suspicions on how the race is going to go based on my appraisal of the candidates, conventional wisdom, and gut feeling.

How I think the Iowa Caucuses are going to go down on January 3rd:

DEMOCRATS
Clinton will win the Iowa caucus. Her name recognition, near-solid campaigning, and ability to deal with the electability question will get her to the top. Obama and Edwards will trail in the 5-15 point range, with Obama squeaking into second place. Even if I'm off by a bit here, it will all likely remain a three-way race after Iowa. My guess is that all other Democrat candidates besides these three (and Kucinich and other fringe candidates) will drop out before February 1st. Clinton, Obama, and Edwards will all stay in the race into February at least.

That being said, I can't see Edwards winning the nomination. I think he'll have an impact on the contest between Clinton and Obama. Already, he and Obama are splitting the anti-Clinton vote (whatever amount of the Democratic electorate that is). Endorsements usually don't mean much, but an endorsement from Edwards could make a difference at a key moment in the race.

Early on, I thought Richardson would do better than he has. He might be a good running mate pick. A Latino, western governor with foreign policy experience is a good combination for either Clinton or Obama. Though the Dems may be skittish if it looks like the Republicans are going to make this race about immigration since they have no other issues.

REPUBLICANS
The polls say Huckabee. And maybe they're right. He may win Iowa, but he's not going anywhere beyond that. As has been the conventional wisdom the last few months, the contest for the Republican nomination is between Giuliani and Romney. McCain has new strength in his campaign and may very well be a contender again, which certainly surprises me. Quick question: Who has bent over backward the most to appease leaders of the religious right: Romney, McCain or Giuliani?

So, I think Huckabee is the most likely winner in Iowa. Romney will be second by a range within 15 points of Huckabee and McCain will trail as a close third. Giuliani will come in fourth. If McCain comes close to Romney (say, within 5 points), that will boost him significantly in New Hampshire. All four of these candidates will stay in the race after Iowa, but Huckabee will be the first to bow out after a presumed poor showing in New Hampshire (and South Carolina if he gets that far).

I've long said that I couldn't see Rudy Giuliani getting the nomination. Not only does he have the wrong positions, the wrong constituencies, and personal skeletons in his closet, he is a thoroughly unlikable guy. That being said, I'm surprised he's made it this far, and he'll stay in the race into February unless he does horrible in New Hampshire by coming in a distant fourth place or worse.

Romney is still the most likely Republican nominee. I guess McCain isn't out of the picture though. Huckabee might be a reasonable running mate pick for a nominee needing to shore up cred with the religious right.

There you have it. I'll be out of touch next week right after the caucus, but will return to the subject at some point to see how right or wrong I am.