Column: Politics and gambling: odds for the Dem. nod
Published Nov. 9, 2007
I'm kind of sick of hearing about the presidential primaries. What I'm actually sick of is hearing people regurgitate the conventional wisdom when it comes to handicapping a winner.
All I've heard on the Democratic side is "Hillary, Hillary, Hillary."
And although the junior senator from New York is indeed leading in national polls and has a good deal of cash on hand, most people don't seem to realize that the race is far from over.
Loyal readers, I know all of this can be so very confusing. You're busy. You have classes to skip, people to Facebook and football games to not attend this weekend. So I've decided to blend those two great American institutions: politics and gambling. Here are my odds for selected Democratic presidential candidates:
Billary: 3-to-1
As I said earlier, there is a legitimate reason for the conventional wisdom to favor the junior senator from New York. Out of all the Democrats, she is the shrewdest campaigner and is highly skilled at manipulating media. The aura of inevitability concerning a Hillary victory wasn't an accident. She's been laying the groundwork for this since 2005 when she spent millions more than necessary to win a landslide re-election to the Senate. Her campaign is the most tightly run and the most careful. Ironically, it might be this effort to not offend any voters that derails her.
Barack Out: 5-to-1
Barack Obama is a smart man, a good politician and a fine public speaker. That being said, I'm of the opinion that the Obama campaign is akin to Pedro's in Napoleon Dynamite: Vote for him, and all your wildest dreams will come true. Obama is extremely skilled at making audiences feel good about him and the future, but I've always been left a little deflated after these speeches. The Obama campaign really is running on hope, Despite this, Obama has found traction with primary voters, although a large number of his constituents are those notorious non-voting, college-aged males.
John Boy: 5-to-1
Although the populist with the down-home drawl is running behind Clinton and Obama in the national polls and cash, I'm giving John Edwards the same chance as Obama for a few reasons. One is his solid support in Iowa. The former senator from North Carolina is still polling at a respectable third, despite having been outspent and out-advertised by the Clinton and Obama camps. This strong polling is due to his tremendous effort on the ground.
Joe "Wait 'til next year" Biden: 10-to-1
The poor guy just can't catch a break. He's run for president every cycle since 1988 and has never even been nominated as a vice president. With his strong foreign policy credentials, experience in the Senate and potential ability to raise a large amount of money in the general election, the senator from Delaware could be a strong candidate in the general election. Unfortunately for Joe, he shares one important quality with his state: He's boring as hell.
Bill "Pandering for All" Richardson: 20-to-1
The man who would be both a Red Sox and Yankee fan is indeed polling fourth in Iowa, but I contend that this support is soft. Although people might tell pollsters they are supporting the governor of New Mexico, these voters might shift their positions. Most of Richardson's supporters are drawn to him by his strong anti-war message, I believe that once one of the main tier candidates shifts a bit more to the left, Richardson's supporters will coalesce around one of the big three.
Next Week: I handicap the race to capture the least votes.
Hint: Mike Gravel in a landslide.
avtty5@mizzou.edu