The Republican caucus in Iowa is headed for a photo finish, with the three leading contenders all within two points of each other. Ron Paul is at 20%, Mitt Romney at 19%, and Rick Santorum at 18%. Rounding out the field are Newt Gingrich at 14%, Rick Perry at 10%, Michele Bachmann at 8%, Jon Huntsman at 4%, and Buddy Roemer at 2%. – Public Policy Polling
It’s down to the end in Iowa.
So, here’s the deal. Call Iowa, including percentages, and the closest call wins my book The Hillary Effect – Politics, Sexism and the Destiny of Loss.
Be specific, because a tie will go to the person who most broadly predicts placement of the candidates, but also the numbers. Not just the top three, but all the way down.
Put your prediction in the comments and I’ll sort them out and name a winner on Wednesday.
A whole $4.99 for motivation? Make it hardbound with a handwritten note on the first page and I’ll consider myself duly rewarded…..until then, bragging rights here does more for me.
And Ann Selzer is probably close enough to the ground to at least get the order nailed…..
Romney 24, Paul 22, Santorum 15, Gingrich 12, Perry 11, Bachman 7, Huntsman 2, Other 7
Casualobserver, that’s why I put in a graphic with a link to the hardcover! The hardcover is what I’m offering.
I’d be glad to extend a handwritten note, but it will take a few weeks for the turnaround. As long as that’s understood, no problem. If you win, I’ll gladly oblige.
Copying Seltzer will not win you a copy.
Well, at least you drive a harder bargain than most Democrats….
ok, as edited…..
Romney 23, Paul 21, Santorum 16, Perry 13, Gingrich 10, Bachman 6, Huntsman 2, Other 9
I haven’t been right about anything yet this year, so I might as well try here.
Santorum:29 >> Paul:22 >> Romney:21 >> Gingrich:14 >> Bachmann:5
Perry:5 >> Roemer:3
I see Santorum coming in first, big time. Primarily because I see Bachmann/Perry crashing and burning at the last minute. Do I see him winning the Nomination? Good God no. NH is not kind country to social reactionaries and Santorum is a dweeb, a one trick pony, and a PA political sellout. Besides, he has even less charisma than Bush, Pere. I could say something snarky about Obama being better than Santorum, but I’m a nice guy so I won’t.
As far as the rest goes, I figure if I call Santorum right, the rest doesn’t matter.
I’ll call IA for Paul simply because a caucus is the type of environment that his supporters would excel in. I’ll give the numbers a stab–Paul 24 Romney 21 Santorum 20 Gingrich 11 Perry 9 Bachman 5 Huntsman 2, all others 8
Although I already purchased this first-rate book from Amazon, I’ll take a chance for my niece. (Btw, if I don’t win it (highly likely), my intention is to buy her the book.)
With a significant over-40% of potential caucus goes saying they could still change their mind and vote for someone other than their current choice and given Santorum’s momentum and his 60% approval rating and Paul’s slight but steady decrease in the polls and his growing disapproval rating, here’s my (highly speculative) pick.
Romney 25%
Santorum 24%
Paul 19%
Gingrich 12%
Bachmann 9%
Perry 7%
Huntsman 3%
Roemer 1%
Good luck to everyone who tries their luck!
Very generous of you Taylor and thanks for this cool contest!
Romney – 31%
Santorum – 23%
Paul – 22%
Perry – 10%
Gingrich – 9%
Bachman – 4%
Huntsman – 1%
Roemer - 0%
Thank you, Taylor, for the chance to have a little fun with an otherwise dismal event. Here’s my thinking/guessing on the Iowa caucus
Romney 25
Paul 24
Santorum 19
Gingrich 10
Perry 9
Bachman 8
Romer 3
Huntsman 2
HAH!!!! Its like March Madness all over again. If the #1 seed loses, ALL Y’ALL lose!!!!
I agree with docmks, at least this makes some fun out of an otherwise depressing exercise in faux democracy. I only wish it were like the old days, when Carter surprised everyone by doing so well in Iowa. Sadly, mainstream press coverage is too much about horse races now, and not enough about the issues.
Anyway, my picks:
Paul – 23 %
Romney – 22 %
Perry – 13 %
Santorum – 12 %
Gingrich – 11 %
Bachmann – 10 %
Huntsman – 5 %
Roemer – 2 %
No, that doesn’t add up to 100 %. I don’t remember that being one of the rules. When you round off to the nearest one, that’s going to happen.
I could just as easily pick Romney to win, of course, but since most everyone else did, I’ll be contrarian. Paul seems to have just as good a shot at winning it at this point. He and Mittens seem to have the best organizations, which really counts in caucuses.
I had Santorum first before I changed it to Romney by a slight 1% difference. I still think Republicans want nothing more than to beat the crap out of Obama and I think that will still rule the day and not only in Iowa so that’s why I made Romney the winner but by a tiny amount.
“Sadly, mainstream press coverage is too much about horse races now, and not enough about the issues.” Cujo359
Thank you for saying this. This is one of my pet peeves, cujo.
Very true but it’s not only now that that’s the case, it’s been going on for far too long in this country. The NYTimes, WAPO are nothing but the horse race and forget about Cable, it’s a sewer there as most of us would agree, I think. It’s why i have almost given up on Cable coverage because that is all they are about. I loathe MSNBC as much as I loathe FOX and CNN has deteriorated into a swamp of incoherent so-called “bi-partisan” coverage as if that has/had any worth to begin with ever.
Issues are rarely discussed and when they are it’s superficial with all the current bells and whistle words that shed no light on any of the issues but cloud them more than is worth covering them at all if that’s the meal being served. I’d rather starve if lies and misrepresentations dominate when talking about issues.
Even The PBS Newshour has devolved into an unrecognizable “cousin” of it’s once stellar news broadcast in the 1970′s until the mid 1990′s, the McNeil-Lehrer report which was mostly, imo, the Jewel in the Crown of American broadcast news (outside of the then still first rate Walter Concrite on CBS and Huntley/Brinkley on NBC), but the jewel that was MacNeil/Lehrer almost vanished not soon after McNeil retired in 1995. That’s when I realized it was mostly McNeil (who as I’m sure most know was born in Canada) who was the substance and glue who kept that news broadcast the first rate news report it was for years. Lehrer was not only second fiddle to McNeil but was not up to the standard set by McNeil after his retirement.
Since 1995 during the Clinton Administration (when it was noticeable to many but started to happen during the 1980′s), news reporting deteriorated into something that Ed Murrow warned us of in a speech to his fellow broadcast journalists in a 1958 address. Again, as I’m sure those who are part of this blog know, he warned about the abuse of power perpetrated by a medium that was devolving into “decadence, escapism, and insulation.”
To be fair to the history of American journalism, there has always been a part of that profession that was “yellow” (http://tinyurl.com/5qvb8c) but that was once the exception to the rule of the profession. Now, the greats of American journalists have all but disappeared. Where are the Ida Tarbell’s, Ernie Pyle’s, Edward R. Murrow’s, Fred Friendly’s, I.F.Stone’s, Anthony Lucas’, Martha Gellhorn’s, Mary McGrory’s, Molly Ivins’, or even the once great Woodward and Bernstein (both of whom are now part of the problem you cite)?
There are still some very good journalists including Dana Priest, Seymour Hersh, Jane Mayer, Glenn Greenwald, Earl Ofari Hutchinson but I’m hard pressed to name many more than these modern Murrow’s.
I”m relieved these people are out there doing the great work of exposing the hypocrisy and crimes and misdemeanors of the rich and/or powerful in this country but they are not enough to stem the tide of what you and I bemoan, cujo. I hope I’m wrong.
All too true, I’m afraid. I stopped watching years ago, because the lame journalism that was often on display there was just too much to handle.
It’s been a long, slow slide for American political journalism. I don’t know when it started, but it was probably in the early 1990s, when news organizations became profit centers for most of the companies that owned them.
It certainly wasn’t any later.
Great! Thanks for chiming in.
Should be interesting.
I’ll take submissions until caucus hour, 7pm in Iowa, Tuesday night.
I’m taking a chance on a poll from 1/1 where Paul’s numbers with youth and independents blow away all the other candidates. 18-29 year olds at 52% (Santorum 2nd at 18%), 30-40 year olds at 35% (Gingrich 2nd at 17.4%) and independents at 38% (Romney 2nd at 18.4%). He also has a wider gap with males (33%, 2nd being 16.4% for Gingrich) than the Romney (27%) / Santorum (23%) female split.
Paul – 27%
Romney – 23%
Gingrich – 16%
Santorum – 14%
Perry – 10%
Bachman – 7%
Huntsman – 2%
Other – 1%
Paul 28% Santorum 26% Romney 18% Gingrich 10% Perry 10% Bachman 6% Huntsman 2%