When do they start dropping out? (0.00 / 0)

So far as I know, Duncan Hunter still hasn't dropped out, although then again he may have done but nobody's noticed yet. On the other hand he could stay in, since he seems to be little more than a dull and right-wing version of Kucinich.

He doesn't really have enough support to be influential, whilst Paul's support isn't likely to go to any other Republicans (and it's entirely possible he's in it for the long haul anyway,) but I'm amazed that Thompson's support still hasn't cratered from its (already cratered) level. The guy was beaten by write-ins in NH, for god's sake. And in SC he doesn't look like he has a chance at anything more than second, being generous, which still wouldn't save him with the field so large. So I expect that either his support will be much less than polling suggests in SC, or alternatively that it'll be the last time he polls above 5% and he'll drop out by Super Tuesday. Giuliani to leave the race on February 6th.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

---

by: Englishlefty @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 10:02:25 AM CST

Hunter (4.00 / 1)

Oh yeah, that guy. I don't even know what he looks like. If he held a coke party on the Capitol steps, I wonder if the press would even notice.

Super Tuesday will shake out a lot of the field, maybe even determine the nominees. Won't be long now...

---

by: Chris Bowers @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 10:08:29 AM CST

[ Parent ]

We know him well in San Diego (0.00 / 0)

And might be getting 30 more years of Dunc Jr. in Congress if we aren't careful.

John McCain opposes the GI Bill.

---

by: Lucas O'Connor @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:26:53 AM CST

[ Parent ]

I bet a lot of the press would notice... (0.00 / 0)

they might choose to look the other way, though (the other way being a direction roughly parallel to the step and perpendicular to a rolled-up $20 bill.)

By the way, realclearpolitics.com has adjusted their superdelegate counts in the past day or so, showing a movement away from Clinton and toward Obama. Know anything about that?

---

by: Max Fletcher @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 13:56:09 PM CST

[ Parent ]

One Thing Chris (0.00 / 0)

that you are leaving out that you used to include in your Nomination at a Glance section (which I have loved by the way) is the cash on hand numbers.  I mention this because my understanding is that both McCain and Huckabee are still at very low funding levels and that Guliani has blown threw his wad of money in obtaining his one delegate.  Thus, Romney, who could write his campaign a 50 million dollar check, may be the only candidate who can compete nationally on super tuesday.

For several months I have been predicting a Huckabee McCain nomination fight with McCain the winner.  However, while the first part of my prediction occurred (Huckabee wins Iowa, McCain NH) neither got the "bounce" I anticipated.  I thought the conservative economic establishment (what Mike calls the "Royalist" wing-a term used by FDR that I also think is excellent) would rally around McCain as the best person to beat Huckabee.  However, that just hasnt happened.  Huckabee's emergence has been contained so there has been no need for the royalists to choose one candidate to defeat him

This has allowed Romney to remain viable.  The Mittster will win Nev tomorrow, shielding him from whatever happens in SC.  Then, he will be able to throw a huge amount of money into Florida, which will allow him to do respectably well even if he does not win outright-which he might.  So, with a murky GOP picture heading into super tuesday and Romney the only one with the cash to compete nationally, he will be in excellent shape to win that primary day.  I dont think his win will be so massive that he wraps up the nomination, but I do think that he will be the clear front-runner at that point.

---

by: Andy Katz @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 10:07:02 AM CST

I would include cash on hand (0.00 / 0)

If I knew what it was. I agree it is important. However, the last figures we have are from September 30th, and probably not reflective of where things stand today.

We don't know 4th quarter cash on hand. We don't know 4th quarter fundraising totals. We certainly don't know spending and cash raised since January 1st--which should be substantial for everyone involved.

It is important, but we don't know what the numbers are.

---

by: Chris Bowers @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 10:10:45 AM CST

[ Parent ]

When do we get numbers? (0.00 / 0)

I heard new numbers are out January 31st. Is this correct? If so, will you then be adding them in? Alternatively, is there any slightly more subtle method of measuring the impact of cash? Money taking into account daily burn rate? Money and organisation? I wouldn't know where to start and am not sure if it's even possible, and it would almost certainly be far too much work for you, but it's a nice dream.

For that matter, is it even possible to have enough money for February 5th? There are primaries in too many states for really intensive campaigning, so whilst it might make sense to air a few ads just to remind voters of your existence, surely free media and GOTV is going to be more important? If that's the case, then Romney's wealth may be trumped by the media's love for McCain.

Forgotten Countries - a foreign policy-focused blog

---

by: Englishlefty @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:28:30 AM CST

[ Parent ]

Self financing (0.00 / 0)

Mitt Romney has already committed a huge chunk of about $20 million to his campaign.  Since Mitt is worth $250 million, there is plenty more where that came from.  Although plenty have tried, Mitt could become only the second Presidential nominee to self fund a lot of his campaign.  The other guy was John Davis of West Virginia who was chosen as the Democratic candidate (and sacrificial lamb) on the 103rd ballot in 1924.  Davis was a hugely successful lawyer at the time.  His firm of Davis, Polk and Wardwell is still very big and influential.  He argued 140 cases before the US Supreme Court and wikipedia calls him possibly the most successful trial lawyer of the first half of the 20th century.  Uh, Clarence Darrow, anyone,

Davis, like Mitt (and unlike Edwards) was very establishment .  he founded the Council on Foreign Relations, did a lot of corporate work, and raised  a nephew who grew up to be secretary of state (Cyrus Vance).

Mitt's money (and his huge advantage over his Republican rivals) is really a big story to me.  What he's got is advertising (another way of spelling money).  Not good for the country at all.

---

by: David Kowalski @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 10:47:36 AM CST

Off Topic (0.00 / 0)

But what is the virtue of Super Delegates?

John McCain opposes the GI Bill.

---

by: Lucas O'Connor @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 11:27:16 AM CST

No 'virtue' far as I can tell (0.00 / 0)

Just a throw back to less democratic times. That aspect of the system should be abolished, right along with the caucuses.

But they do get to vote at the convention, if that is what your asking.

Also - 10 points to anyone who can find me a 100% complete list of superdelegates. I have scoured the internets and failed to find it. Most of the time, the description of superdelegates is vague, stating that they are elected politicians and "party officials". No one seems to know what "party official" means precisely. Maybe I'll ask Hu Jintao.

"Don't hate the media, become the media" -Jello Biafra

---

by: LandStander @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 14:25:06 PM CST

[ Parent ]

It usually means... (0.00 / 0)

Statewide office holders, Senators, and Congressmen.

Party officials refer to the state chair, vice chair, national committeeman, and national committeewoman of the state party.

Further Reading

---

by: Dave Sund @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 15:50:34 PM CST

[ Parent ]

I want my 10 points (0.00 / 0)

Chris has the link at the bottom of his post, and here they are again:

Endorsing superdelegates

Yet to endorse

We've got almost the complete list - we're about 10 short. Note also that the list is not final from the DNC until March 1.

Here's who's a superdelegate:
NC members, all Democratic members of Congress, all Democratic Governors, all former Democratic Presidents, all former Democratic Vice Presidents, all former Democratic Leaders of the U.S. Senate, all former Democratic Speakers of the U.S. House of Representatives and Democratic Minority Leaders and all former Chairs of the Democratic National Committee.

Hope this helps.

DemConWatch

---

by: msn1 @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 23:54:40 PM CST

[ Parent ]

OK, 9,8 points (0.00 / 0)

And that should be NC members, not DNC members.

DemConWatch

---

by: msn1 @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 23:55:45 PM CST

[ Parent ]

Clinton has Taken? (0.00 / 0)

I wasn't aware that she ever lost the lead in Nevada. She was up nearly 20 points a few weeks ago.  There may have been one poll that showed Obama with a slight lead, actually a statistical tie.  Most Nevada polls have shown Obama gaining steadily for some time now.

---

by: converse @ Fri Jan 18, 2008 at 14:48:12 PM CST