New Hampshire predictions

I note that Slate is congratulating a reader who guessed the top 3 finishers for both Repubs and Dems. Well, I got everything right except flipping Biden and Richardson (heard some guy on the radio say he was going for Biden, so I did it for the hell of it!). OK, this is a bit easier I think...but here I go....

Republicans:
McCain
Romney
Huckabee
Paul
Giuliani
Thompson
Hunter
Keyes

Democrats:
Obama
Clinton
Edwards
Richardson
Kucinich
Gravell

Most of these are "gimmes" now and I've followed "conventional wisdom" (e.g., Obama up, Clinton down), with the main exception being that I think Paul will over-perform and pass the deflating Giuliani. Percentages to come.... (after I do a little more reading)

Tags

More like this

How did I do? First, I got the rank order pretty much down! The only mistake was swapping Richardson and Biden. Second, I didn't know how the Iowa Democratic Caucus was set up...otherwise, I would have been retarded to not assume it would have taken a "Winner Take All" outcome due to the 15%…
The primary happens tomorrow, and I'm ready with my predictions (see my Iowa outcome). Republicans: McCain - 33% Romney - 30% Huckabee - 14% Paul - 12% Giuliani - 7% Thompson - 3% Hunter - 1% Keyes - 0% Democrats: Obama - 45% Clinton - 30% Edwards - 19% Richardson - 4% Kucinich - 2% Gravel - 0%…
There's a new initiative to get a presidential debate on issues of science and technology: Science Debate 2008 (list of supporting Important People (capital letters) and bloggers (no capital letters).) I'm all for the idea, since I know little about the candidates positions related to science and…
Some of the other SciBlings are doing it, so why not ... My compatibility with the current gaggle of presidential candidates: Kucinich (95) Gravel (90) Richardson (82) Edwards (81) Dodd (78) Clinton (74) Obama (72) Biden (72) Paul (61) McCain (44) Thompson (38) Huckabee (36) Romney (35) Giuliani (…

If you're right again, I'll be a believer!

This is very impressive. But where are the lovely cats?

Actually, a win in Iowa isn't always a good indicator for how a candidate will do in other primaries. For example, Bill Clinton lost Iowa in 1992; George H. W. Bush lost it in '88; and Reagan in '80.

As for New Hampshire, I would actually place Paul above Huckabee ain that primary because the N.H. electorate seems to be far more sympathetic to Paul's views than the evangelical protectionism espoused by Huckabuck.

Actually, a win in Iowa isn't always a good indicator for how a candidate will do in other primaries. For example, Bill Clinton lost Iowa in 1992; George H. W. Bush lost it in '88; and Reagan in '80.

as other's have pointed out, your N is small. IOW, the indicator isn't statistically significant either way.

Keyes?

Are you sure you don't mean Tancredo?