Early odds in U.S. presidential race

http://www.iht.com/bin/printfriendly.php?id=8875160



<span style="font-size:18pt;line-height:100%">Early odds in U.S. presidential race
</span>By Albert R. Hunt

Bloomberg News Sunday, December 23, 2007 The gates are about to open for the American presidential race. The early odds, if history is an indicator, will be close to the mark.

Looking at bookmakers in Las Vegas and London, and the crystal balls of a few seasoned political practitioners from both parties, a clear line has emerged.

First are the elements of a Democratic year. Pay less attention to the close general-election trial heats; they are lagging indicators, as Ronald Reagan, circa December 1979, and Bill Clinton, circa December 1991, could have told you.

The fundamentals - the country's mood, the political cycle, the likely shape of the economy and the movement of certain constituencies like Latinos and young voters - all tilt Democratic.

Thus, lay down 7 to win 5 on a Democrat's taking the presidential oath of office 13 months from now, 2 to 1 that it's a Republican, and 20 to 1 on an independent or third-party candidate.

The odds for the Democrats to win the presidency include:

HILLARY CLINTON: If the senator from New York wins the Jan. 3 Iowa caucuses, she's a prohibitive favorite for the nomination. She's the only candidate who could survive a couple of early losses and conceivably bounce back. Clinton, 60, would have a difficult general-election matchup with John McCain; against anyone else, she'd be a favorite.

As of today, however, she's an underdog in Iowa, and her aura of inevitability is gone. Still, given all the vicissitudes, if you could bet on only one candidate, there is no stronger choice. The odds of Hillary Clinton's becoming the nation's 44th president: 3 to 1.

BARACK OBAMA: If this horse breaks into the open, he may be the political equivalent of Secretariat. Yet, as well as the freshman senator from Illinois has done, he'll face withering tests in the next few weeks - Clinton supporters are already going after him personally - and nagging doubts about whether race and inexperience make him vulnerable.

Nevertheless, victories in Iowa, and in New Hampshire on Jan. 8, are within sight for Obama, 46, and would shake up the political universe. His chances of becoming the first African-American president: 7 to 2.

JOHN EDWARDS: An Iowa win remains within reach. "Obama has a lot going, but we think we have the best organization and the most-committed caucusgoers," said David Bonior, Edwards's campaign manager. Edwards, 54, the 2004 Democratic vice presidential candidate, does better than anyone in either party in many general election head-to-head polls. Yet it's difficult to see how he can marshal the financial resources and political support for a war of attrition in the primaries. Odds for the North Carolinian: 10 to 1.

Of Senators Christopher Dodd and Joseph Biden and Governor Bill Richardson, never will so many political heavyweights have dropped out so quickly; the rest of the field combined has odds of 40 to 1.

The Republican calculations are dicier:

MITT ROMNEY: His Dec. 6 speech about religion didn't put the issue of his Mormonism to rest, but it did provide a much-needed shot in the arm for Romney, 60, especially when it was followed by the endorsement of the influential conservative magazine National Review. The campaign is right to ignore poor standings in national polls; wins in Iowa and New Hampshire are the sine qua non of the Romney rationale.

The former Massachusetts governor's general election prospects have been weakened by a plethora of politically opportunistic policy reversals, ranging from social issues, like abortion, to immigration and taxes. Still, some Republican has to win the nomination, and no one has a better shot than his 5-to-1 odds.

JOHN McCAIN: He can come back from the politically dead - if he wins the New Hampshire primary. He is the Republican that Democrats fear most in the election.

However, McCain, 71, is still irrationally reviled in some Republican circles. If he gains traction, the immigration-bashers will come after him with a vengeance. He's a great boxing fan and probably can cite fighters who have won despite the 8-to-1 odds he faces.

RUDOLPH GIULIANI: The toughness and resilience of the former New York mayor is one of the great stories of 2007. To the shock of most Republican insiders, Giuliani, 63, has led in the national polls throughout this year.

The Giuliani scenario of jump-starting a campaign after the first few contests has never worked before, and his personal problems/scandals are taking a toll.

With a third-party bid looming by religious conservatives if he's the nominee, mark him down for 10 to 1.

MIKE HUCKABEE: The flavor of the month is galvanizing the religious right.

He is the most natural campaigner in the Republican field. An Iowa victory is essential and possible. Where Huckabee, 52, goes then is problematic, other than a few select Southern primaries. A 12-to-1 shot.

FRED THOMPSON: In September he was smart, charming and acceptably conservative. The only debate in most party circles today is whether the prospects for Thompson, 65, were overrated or whether he has blown his chance. In any case, the Fizzle of 2007 is, charitably, at 20 to 1.

The odds on any other Republican are 25 to 1, as widespread dissatisfaction persists about the choices. If Florida's former governor, Jeb Bush, had a different last name, these odds would be a lot shorter.

An overarching consideration, the Democratic wise man James Johnson notes, is which party's nomination will be decided earliest. He is convinced that it will be the Democrats'.

In 8 of the past 10 elections, the party that settled its nomination first won the presidency in November.

 

No mention of Ron Paul (my guy).

Here's my take.

Hillary has to be slightly favored over Obama right now, but that would change with victories in either Iowa or New Hampshire. He wins one, it's an even race, he wins both and he's got a clear lead. Edwards is just loony in the first place. He can't even win the senator race in his own home state.

Democrats are crazy to not consider Bill Richardson, he's got every quality you want in a president. Ambassador to UN - check, he has foreign policy nailed. Governor of New Mexico - check, he has executive branch experience. Popular across party lines - check, can unite the country. Plus he's a minority (Hispanic), which could be huge with all the immigration debate going on as well as the growth of the Hispanic population.

Giuliani and McCain have what it takes to slug it out with the Democrats' nominee, but they're not well liked by social conservatives in their own party. Romney faces similar issues, as he was "liberal" as governor, but saying (flip flop) the right things lately.

The guy who should emerge from the pack is Fred Thompson. He's a well reasoned conservative, and does have most of the qualities that Reagan had. What he lacks is charisma, which is a turnoff for voters (not that it makes a bit of difference about his abiltity to do the job!).

The wildcards are Ron Paul and Michael Bloomberg. Paul has enough money to go the distance, regardless of how he does in the early primaries, and he has strong grass-roots support that may not be showing up in the early polls. Bloomberg has all the money he needs to rapidly build the ground organizations in all the states to make a considerably strong run as a 3rd party candidate. He could spend $.5B of his own cash and not miss it, leaving him not beholden to any campaign contributors.

Paul is said to be considering a 3rd party run himself, since the Republican machine has the deck stacked against him. But he adamantly says he wouldn't consider it when asked by the media.

 

Except Gore is a buffoon.

He is the darling of Hollywood, tho.

 

I think the Iowa and New Hampshire primaries are going to give us a big clue as to who we will be seeing battling it out in November.

A few of my thoughts:

I think if Huckabee doesn't win Iowa, he is done. He has come out of nowhere to being the leader in the polls in Iowa. The latest polls see him dropping and basically tied with Romney. Personally, I hope Huckabee loses badly in Iowa and is forced from the race. With his stance on the Fair Tax alone, that makes him pretty much unelectable. Just because he is a "good Christian" doesn't make him the right choice for America.

John McCain's only hope is to win New Hampshire. He won it in 2000 and it is basically his home turf. If he doesn't win, you can pretty much count him out of the race. If he pull it out, I expect him to put up a decent shot in Florida. I was on his website the other day and listened to his campaign manager's plan and he expects a Florida win. He is the only Republican candidate that is doing considerably well in a general election match up vs. Clinton or Obama. I don't think he will make it that far though.

Rudy Giuliani has so many personal issues in his life, I won't vote for him if he makes it to the General Election. He knows he is going to lose Iowa and New Hampshire and is counting on a win in Florida to launch his campaign.

John Edwards, I am not the biggest fan of. Personally I think the Democratic nomination is a two-person race between Clinton and Obama. If Edwards doesn't win Iowa, I think you can count his run over. He was an idiot to except the financing assistance for the primary election. That decision right there handicapped him from the beginning.

I think Mitt Romney will win either Iowa and/or New Hampshire. He is the strongest Republican candidate, IMO.

Clinton/Obama is a very interesting match-up to me and I think both of them can survive defeats in Iowa and New Hampshire due to their nationwide popularity and their previous fundraising support.

<div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Denny Crane)</div><div class='quotemain'>Democrats are crazy to not consider Bill Richardson, he's got every quality you want in a president. Ambassador to UN - check, he has foreign policy nailed. Governor of New Mexico - check, he has executive branch experience. Popular across party lines - check, can unite the country. Plus he's a minority (Hispanic), which could be huge with all the immigration debate going on as well as the growth of the Hispanic population.</div>

I think Richardson all along has known he had no shot at the Democratic nomination. The Democrats are in the best position and have two very strong candidates for President. Richardson has been running all along to place himself on a ticket as a Vice President candidate and I believe he will be either Clinton or Obama's VP.