# Aug. 2007 - Who did you think the nominees would be? **URL:** \ **Category:** Politics & Elections\ **Created:** [August 17, 2015, 3:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040 "2015-08-17T03:42:12Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 16\ **Page:** 2
**Author:** ![Nema98](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/d2c977/32.png) [@Nema98](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Nema98)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 3:58am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/21 "2015-08-19T03:58:02Z")
I thought Hillary would be it, and for the pubs, Guiliani. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 4:10am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/22 "2015-08-19T04:10:37Z")
> [@Ulf\_the\_Unwashed](#): > > Those of you saying McCain–are you sure? Summer of '07 was a very difficult time for the senator. He ran out of money and had to “restructure” his campaign, laying people off and cutting expenses to the bone. His poll numbers were very low…I don’t recall all of the details, but there were plenty of articles pretty much writing him off at that point. McCain seemed like the establishment guy that year even though he got off to a rough start. I thought that would make him unpalatable to the party. But he did have the heart of the party and a lot of people seemed to be backing him until he stepped it up to a new level of crazy at the convention. ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 5:25am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/23 "2015-08-19T05:25:22Z")
Hillary and Giuliani. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 5:42am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/24 "2015-08-19T05:42:34Z")
In June 2006 I predicted Obama would be elected… in 2016. [Cite](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7476024&postcount=3). In June 2007, I thought Obama would do better than Hillary in the general election: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8713374&postcount=141](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8713374&postcount=141) [QUOTE=MfM in June 2007] Victory is a combination of turning out your supporters, switching the allegiances of swing voters and discouraging the opposition from voting, depending upon your morality. My take is that there are a lot of Americans who don’t like Hillary and don’t want to. Some of their reasons are pretty laughable: their critiques (She’s ambitious! She’s pro-choice! She voted for the Iraq war!) are banal and wholly unexceptional among the political set. Nonetheless, I’m guessing that Hillary’s political personality -a cartoon really- just turns a lot of people off, including swing voters. Sure she won in NY, but Hillary is good at retail politics due to her command of detail, strong listening skills and serviceable glad-handling. Furthermore, she inspires loyalty among her staff. But life isn’t fair. Methinks Hillary would have trouble in the general election against a decent Republican opponent. I’d opt for Obama, Richardson or Edwards. [/QUOTE] I think Hillary’s prospects are stronger now and the Republican lineup much weaker and inexperienced. In Aug 2007 I endorsed Barack Obama for electability reasons: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8875499&postcount=37](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8875499&postcount=37) ---
**Author:** ![Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/q/f04885/32.png) [@Qin\_Shi\_Huangdi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Qin_Shi_Huangdi)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 6:16am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/25 "2015-08-19T06:16:36Z")
> [@Measure\_for\_Measure](#): > > In June 2006 I predicted Obama would be elected… in 2016. [Cite](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=7476024&postcount=3). > > In June 2007, I thought Obama would do better than Hillary in the general election: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8713374&postcount=141](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8713374&postcount=141) I think Hillary’s prospects are stronger now and the Republican lineup much weaker and inexperienced. > > In Aug 2007 I endorsed Barack Obama for electability reasons: [http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8875499&postcount=37](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=8875499&postcount=37) Hillary would have done much better in 2008 compared to Obama-due to racial resentments, Obama probably significantly underperformed in light of the Bush administration’s unpopularity. For example, Clinton probably would have won Georgia by swinging enough of the white vote there and possibly Arkansas and West Virginia. Certainly, there would have been no collapse of the white Democratic vote in the South and Appalachia. ---
**Author:** ![Measure\_for\_Measure](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/measure_for_measure/32/557_2.png) [@Measure\_for\_Measure](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Measure_for_Measure)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 7:39am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/26 "2015-08-19T07:39:29Z")
My current take is that freakouts in the swamp are inevitable regardless of who the Democrats nominate. Back in 2007 I thought that Obama was simply a more attractive candidate. Since then, Hillary has grown in stature due to her stewardship of the State Department. But my views of Aug 2007 have moved on. Bush wasn’t up for re-election. Obama beat the Fair model’s baseline twice. So he was a decent candidate, though not a fantastic one. I’m no longer convinced that Hillary would do substantially worse and I weigh the swing vote much less. The regional considerations outlined by Qin are noteworthy. I did not anticipate that the Republicans would react to Obama’s election year speech making with record levels of focused obstructionism. McConnell even filibustered a bill that he himself had sponsored. ---
**Author:** ![dracoi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/90db22/32.png) [@dracoi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dracoi)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 5:40pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/27 "2015-08-19T17:40:06Z")
> [@Ulf\_the\_Unwashed](#): > > Those of you saying McCain–are you sure? Summer of '07 was a very difficult time for the senator. He ran out of money and had to “restructure” his campaign, laying people off and cutting expenses to the bone. His poll numbers were very low…I don’t recall all of the details, but there were plenty of articles pretty much writing him off at that point. > > I don’t remember who I thought would be the Republican nominee at that moment, but it would not have been McCain. On the Dem side, I thought for a long while it would be Edwards…the one I liked least of the three, but I believed at the time that he was eminently electable in. Other primaries and general election and would be the likely nominee. Ha! Shows how much I knew. I was sure. It’s the same reason I think people are stupid if they are writing off Jeb Bush this early in the current election cycle, and why I was not surprised to see Romney eventually take the nomination in 2012. “The establishment” is not just just short-hand for “boring” - the word establishment should tell you something. They’re… well… established. ---
**Author:** ![AK84](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/85e7bf/32.png) [@AK84](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/AK84)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 6:17pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/28 "2015-08-19T18:17:20Z")
I though that McCain would win over Hilary. Iraq vote ruined Hilary and financial crises did in McCain. ---
**Author:** ![Richard\_Parker](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/35a633/32.png) [@Richard\_Parker](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Richard_Parker)\ **Post date:** [August 19, 2015, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/29 "2015-08-19T19:12:51Z")
> [@AK84](#): > > … and financial crises did in McCain. Not really. Obama led McCain for the entire period except for a week or two following the RNC convention. Maybe there was a huge Palin bump that was wiped out by the financial collapse. But an equally probable read is that the Palin bump was wiped out by Palin. ---
**Author:** ![astorian](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/ad7895/32.png) [@astorian](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/astorian)\ **Post date:** [August 20, 2015, 3:22pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/30 "2015-08-20T15:22:12Z")
I said right after the last election results were posted that it would be Jeb Bush vs. Hillary Clinton in 2016, and I still think so. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2015, 3:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/31 "2015-08-21T03:36:36Z")
Hillary Clinton=Martha Coakley. ---
**Author:** ![dalej42](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/67e7ee/32.png) [@dalej42](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/dalej42)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2015, 1:35pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/32 "2015-08-21T13:35:29Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Hillary Clinton=Martha Coakley. Except that Hillary was elected in all of her races. ---
**Author:** ![TriPolar](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/tripolar/32/3008_2.png) [@TriPolar](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/TriPolar)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2015, 1:36pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/33 "2015-08-21T13:36:51Z")
> [@dalej42](#): > > Except that Hillary was elected in all of her races. Really? She was the Democratic nominee in 2008? I must have missed that. ---
**Author:** ![Rhinocerosis](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/d9b06d/32.png) [@Rhinocerosis](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Rhinocerosis)\ **Post date:** [August 21, 2015, 9:28pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/34 "2015-08-21T21:28:53Z")
Thinking back, I thought Huckabee was coming on strong, with his populist views (in that cycle, it seemed like he had less of the evangelical message that he does in 2016). From the looks of it, he was one of the last candidates to end his campaign and came in second (behind McCain) in delegates – ahead of Romney. ---
**Author:** ![Ulf\_the\_Unwashed](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/u/b4bc9f/32.png) [@Ulf\_the\_Unwashed](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ulf_the_Unwashed)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2015, 4:47am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/35 "2015-08-22T04:47:40Z")
> [@adaher](#): > > Hillary Clinton=Martha Coakley. Oh, come on. I stumped for Martha Coakley when she ran against Scott Brown. I’m sure I’ve written about this before, but what an awful campaign she ran and what a terrible candidate she turned out to be. She deserved to lose, and she did. I didn’t work for Hillary in NY for her senate run, due entirely to schedule issues, but as a resident of NY-not-NYC I followed her campaign closely. She ran an outstanding campaign and worked extremely hard to overcome the "carpetbagger " label (among other jabs her opponents hurled at her). She spent enormous amounts of time upstate, where many people were especially suspicious of her, and it paid off. She deserved to win, and she did. They’re both Democratic women active in politics in the northeast. Otherwise the comparison is just silly. ---
**Author:** ![adaher](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/a/dec6dc/32.png) [@adaher](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/adaher)\ **Post date:** [August 22, 2015, 5:20am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040/36 "2015-08-22T05:20:28Z")
True, she did actually win her easy races. A Democrat should win in New York(and Massachusetts too). Clinton did, Coakley didn’t. Twice. The reason I made the comparison is because like Coakley, Clinton has twice started out as a prohibitive favorite. The first time she fell short and much like Coakley’s second run, she’s taking on water early. Even up till a month before the election, few seemed to believe that Coakley would actually blow it again, but she did. People seem to think the same about Clinton. [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/aug-2007-who-did-you-think-the-nominees-would-be/728040.md?page=1)