February 2, 2008

Rock paper scissors.

McCain beats Clinton.

Clinton beats Romney.

Romney beats Obama.

Obama beats McCain.


Danny said...

"Romney beats Obama"

In Utah?

Synova said...

I think you're right.

Sadly, I think it might have gone...

Fred beats Hillary.

Fred beats Obama.


Elliott A said...

The pollsters do not take into account the very large number of died-in-the-wool republicans who will not vote for McCain. Some of the women will vote for Hillary, a lot of other folks will sit out the voting. In a scenario where 1% to 2% is the likely margin in popular voting, the loss of votes will be catastrophic. I couldn't vote for Hillary on principle, but I couldn't vote for McCain either. In my eight previous POTUS elections I have always voted republican. Not if McCain is the nominee. The younger republicans (21-25) really dislike McCain almost ot the point that the libs dislike Pres. Bush. according to my law school son.

Romney will do much better in the general if he is the nominee than the polls now indicate since so few people have had a real chance to hear him. While he may have flipped recently on a lot of his views, he is more trustworthy to maintain his currently stated positions than McCain.

Obama will have a hard time in the general because he is a surrender guy. Whether or not we should be in iraq, it will be difficult to profess a policy opposed to General Petrayus, who does not want any deadlines. We have already planned drawdowns, and by November they will have been significant. Promising to redeploy all troops and civilians will not fly.

While Hillary will say and do anything to get elected, she will be dependably practical as president. People know this and coupled with the votes McCain won't get, Hillary will beat him.

This far out, the polls are worthless. Look back at early polls from the last few elections and the end result bears little resemblance to them. Perhaps teh musical chairs prediction here reflects that.

walter neff said...

Potvin beats his wife.

Kurt Shoens said...

I don't understand a conservative antipathy to McCain so strong that people would rather not vote at all rather than vote for him. Doesn't abstaining enhance the fortunes of a candidate even less desirable for conservatives?
What are McCain's conservative transgressions anyway? Amnesty for illegal immigrants? Campaign finance reform? Being the only Republican member of the Keating Five?
If McCain were elected, what do conservatives fear he'd do?
Are the risks to conservative values so much less with Romney?

EnigmatiCore said...

Love Notre Dame. They don't beat anybody.

I'm Full of Soup said...

I thought it went... the ref beats his wife, the ref beats his wife.

dbp said...

You have it right, at least as far as I am concerned.

I will vote for Romney no matter who the Democrats run, because I like him.

I will vote for McCain if Clinton is his opponent since I dislike and distrust her even more than him.

If it is McCain v. Obama, I will probably not vote. I like Obama as a person but disagree with him on pretty much every issue while I dislike and distrust McCain.

amba said...

Great minds . . .

john marzan said...

Annn!!! I was about to post that very same idea and formulation last week in my blog, using that very same title!

Mccain beats Hillary, Hillary beats Romney, Romney beats Obama, Obama beats McCain.

Ann Althouse said...


John, I wonder if your reasoning was the same as mine.

Amba, I hadn't read that. When you picture the various pairs actually fighting it out to the end, who do you see beating who? You have polls, which I think don't show how people will judge the candidates when they see them side by side.

George M. Spencer said...

Nominees always fight for the center come fall.

Obama is too far to the left to trick enough people into thinking he's a centrist.

McCain's made a history of doing hold-your-nose deals with the other party.

(Isn't that one of the prime qualities of a good president? A willingness to compromise?)

Hard core righties who say they'll sit at home on election day will change their tune come November. They just all crying cause Fred went fishin'.

cardeblu said...

McCain beats Clinton.
Clinton beats Romney.
Romney beats Obama.
Obama beats McCain.

"Dressing up in costumes, playing silly games
Hiding out in tree-tops, shouting out rude names

-whistling tunes we hide in the dunes by the seaside
-whistling tunes we piss on the goons in the jungle

Its a knockout

If looks could kill they probably will
In games without frontiers-wars without tears
If looks could kill they probably will
In games without frontiers-war without tears
Games without frontiers-war without tears..."
(Peter Gabriel)

The post just reminded me of that song, that's all.

amba said...

Who do I see beating whom? Good question. I would've thought I knew how to answer it before I saw how much the far right hates McCain, which I don't comprehend. Will Romney wind up being the nominee just to retain that wing?

Just off the top of my head, OK, either Dem beats Romney. Hillary beats McCain (because of the above). McCain beats Obama, unless people start seriously worrying about McCain's age.

Swifty Quick said...

Your poll data is a snapshot of today. The general election is still 9 months out. Political fortunes are made and lost a couple of times over in that much time.

john marzan said...


John, I wonder if your reasoning was the same as mine.

what was your reasoning? you didn't post it here.

okay, here's mine.

mccain beats hillary because mccain will eventually unite the republican conservative party with some independents against hillary. he beats her because he actually has more experience and is more credible than her on national security, iraq. He's more trustworthy than her.

Hillary beats Romney because dirty negative campaigning (which the clintons are good at) will be effective against an unpopular and little known romney. they can easily define romney before he gets to define himself. She's unlikable. He's unlikable. She's phony. He's phony. In this battle, i see the more experienced and ruthless hillary winning.

Romney beats Obama because the country is headed towards a recession and Obama is too inexperienced, too unqualified to hand over the reins of power to. Obama's style works in Romney's favor because obama's too nice to resort to sleazy, below the belt tricks. And romney will be able to unite the republican party against Obama, unlike Mccain.

Obama beats McCain because if you put the two side by side, who do you think is more attractive, the forty something obama, or the grumpy old mccain? yes yes... obama will beat mccain on style, not substance, the same way he beats hillary if gets the nomination. and mccain will not be able to unite the GOP party vs. obama.

john marzan said...

I predict a McCain Romney ticket in 08.

john marzan said...

mccain-romney ticket vs. clinton-obama ticket

Mccain > Hillary
VP Romney > VP Obama

XWL said...

Or there's the possibility of a tie (269 to 269 in the Electoral College, take all the same red/blue states from 2004, and flip 17 votes (IA, NV, and NM for example) there's your tie.

Then things would get really crazy.

XWL said...


(there that should do it)

Just apply the above closing parentheses to my comment above (it belongs at the end of College), I hate forgetting to close parentheses.

There's also a missing comma in there somewhere, insert as needed.

Mortimer Brezny said...

McCain would be smart to have Obama as his VP if Hillary wins the nomination. He'd win over about half of the votes of the Democrats and have a working majority for change.

amba said...

And he'd lose about half the Republicans, Mortimer, on top of the ones who already hate him.

Peter Hoh said...

Romney defeats Romney.

Clinton (B) undermines Clinton (H).

Seriously, November is too far away. Were the campaigns to stay where they are -- that is, should no additional issues rise up, should no scandals break, etc., here's how I think it would play nationally.

Either Democrat beats Romney. Clinton would hit him hard with the flip-flopper label that he can't get on message. Neither candidate inspires much, but Clinton gets out more votes in crucial states. Obama would pull in many more swing voters than Romney, while encouraging huge turnout among Democrats.

McCain beats Clinton. He gets the independents, and Clinton gets the unhappy wing of the GOP back in line.

Obama beats McCain. Obama and McCain may split the independents, but Obama wins by getting huge turnout in some reddish-purple states.

reader_iam said...
This comment has been removed by the author.
Peter Hoh said...

There's no such thing as a Clinton-Obama ticket.

If I am wrong, I will subject myself to your derision, and remain silent on this blog for 40 days and 40 nights.

Eli Blake said...

John Marzan:

I predict a McCain Romney ticket in 08.

Are you nuts?

As much as those two obviously detest each other? You'd do better to try and put together a Nancy Kerrigan-Tonya Harding pairs figure skating team. Or maybe Kevin Federline and Brittney Spears singing a duet. Or here's one: Barry Bonds and Bud Selig team up to promote baseball. Or, maybe Ann and Glenn Greenwald do a blog post together.

Never happen.

I do believe (especially after watching the debate the other night) that Obama/Clinton or Clinton/Obama is likely.

In that case, I predict that McCain goes with Mel Martinez.

But still likely loses in November.

Roost on the Moon said...

For what it's worth, I think peter hoh nailed it exactly.

Peter Hoh said...

Thanks, Roost.

Mortimer Brezny said...

And he'd lose about half the Republicans, Mortimer, on top of the ones who already hate him.

The half of Republicans McCain would lose are those Republicans who already hate McCain. In any event, they'd stay home, not vote for Hillary Clinton.

Mr. Forward said...

Boxers beat briefs

Oprah beats Chuck

Kucinich beats retreat

Everybody beats Ron Paul

Carrots beat Onion Rings

Joan said...

McCain's a loser no matter who the Democrats end up nominating. As soon as he gets the nod, the gloves will come off, and he'll cease being the media darling he has been for all these years. People will be embarrassed to vote for him after the MSM -- never mind the Clinton attack machine -- get through with him.

If McCain's going to be the Republican nominee (I'm not 100% convinced of that yet), I hope the Dems put up Hillary. She's tough and can be practical, and I don't think she'll withdraw precipitously from Iraq. I'd rather have her than Obama. But I'd rather have Romney than any of them.

rhhardin said...

Obama could work in Hillary's Global Village, raising the spirits of the women.

hdhouse said...

how about

Bible beats SlyFox
Bible beats Wierdoldman
Wierdoldman beats FlyFox
Wierdoldman thumps Bible
Wierdoldman and Slyfox beat up on HermanMunster and MrMean
Wierdoldman and Slyfox bore each other to death.

KCFleming said...

So which socialist do I vote for?

The young guy with good looks, energy and trendiness galore?

The school marm who wants to take things away from me for my own good?

The war hero whose response to his own financial indiscretions was to restrict our ability to speak about candidates?

Or the Joseph Smithy, whose own state is chasing health care into the toilet using collectivist principles?

Fred, I miss your ugly face.

Anonymous said...



So, it's rock-paper-scissors and... Don't they teach basic numbers in Liberalville? Does 3=4 when convenient, or is it more "the numbers don't matter it's the feeling that counts"?

ricpic said...

"So which socialist do I vote for?"

You don't. You don't vote. You keep your self-respect. Far more important.

Peter V. Bella said...

George said:
Obama is too far to the left to trick enough people into thinking he's a centrist.

And where is Clinton? She is about as far left as Obama, if not farther. She has just been cautious. She has carefully avoided sponsoring or implementing any signifigant legislation- which would tell us where she stands. She has voted all over the place.

But look at what she wants and what Obama wants. There is little difference.

Obama represents a modicum of Democratic change. Clinotn preresents the same old same old Democratic Party.

Same with Romney and McCain. One is entrenched the other is from the outside.

marklewin said...

Which is why I hope Nader runs again. His message resonates with me.....I'm sick of all the crap that spews from the Dems, Pubs, and their media organs (MSNBC, CNN, Fox).

Latino said...

"So which socialist do I vote for?"
Or you could write Fred's name in. Since I live in NY my vote doesn't count anyway, so I am thinking of sending a message to the Republicans.
Why do conservatives dislike McCain? Because aside from the war and abortion, he is a liberal. Or more precisely a populist; combine those two issues where he is on the right with his anti-capitalist rhetoric, his McCain-Feingold anti-speech legislation, his faith in the global warming meme, and populist is where you end up.
Given all that, I think Republicans will end up holding their noses and voting for him, rather than either Democrat. The "Republicans love Obama" theme is ridiculous.

Revenant said...

McCain would be smart to have Obama as his VP if Hillary wins the nomination. He'd win over about half of the votes of the Democrats and have a working majority for change.

That's a nonsensical idea.

You and I are watching TV. You think the current show stinks. I think the current show stinks. Congratulations, you and I have a consensus that Change Is Necessary. But that doesn't mean we agree in the slightest about what channel to change TO.

Having "a working majority for change" is politically useless. You need a working majority with a GOAL -- "change" is just the process by which you achieve that goal. It isn't an end in itself.