Presidential Election of 2008

“Change” Elections: 1800, 1828, 1860, 1896, 1912, 1932, 1960, 1968, 1980, 2000, 2008, And Now 2016?

America has now had 58 Presidential elections, and it can now be said that 12 of them, about 20 percent, have been transformational elections.

In 1800, for the first time. the “opposition” won the Presidency, when Thomas Jefferson defeated John Adams.

In 1828, the “common man”, Andrew Jackson, was elected over John Quincy Adams, and all white males over 21, whether or not property owners, were able to vote, and Jackson was perceived as representing the western frontiersman and the urban worker.

In 1860, Abraham Lincoln’s victory ushered in a new political party, the Republican Party, as dominant for the next half century, and the Civil War developed out of the split over slavery and its expansion between the Union and the Confederacy. But the sectionalism of that period still exists in many ways in 2017.

In 1896, William McKinley’s victory over William Jennings Bryan promoted the growth of industry and urbanizastion over the previously predominant agricultural and rural nature of America, but in reality, that conflict still exists in 2017.

In 1912, the high point of progressive reform, and the evolution of government playing a major role in the economy from that point on, became a long term reality, with three Presidents–the past President Theodore Roosevelt; the incumbent President William Howard Taft; and the future President Woodrow Wilson—all competing in promoting what one could call the most reform oriented election, with all three Presidents being “progressive” to different degrees.

In 1932, Franklin D. Roosevelt’s victory over Herbert Hoover, was the time of the beginning of Democratic Party dominance, and ever bigger national government, even beyond the Progressive Era of the early 20th century.

In 1960, the election of John F. Kennedy was the triumph of overcoming the “religion issue”, as our first non Protestant President, a Roman Catholic from Massachusetts, was accomplished.

In 1968, the election of Richard Nixon marked the beginning of a turn to the Right, although Nixon actually continued and expanded elements of the Great Society of Lyndon B. Johnson in domestic affairs.

In 1980, Ronald Reagan’s victory marked the sharpest turn to the Right since Calvin Coolidge in the 1920s, and began an era of conservative government, that in many respects, continued under his successors, George H. W. Bush and Bill Clinton.

In 2000, the Supreme Court intervention in the Florida vote count, and the awarding of Florida to George W. Bush by 537 votes, giving him the Presidency, was a revolutionary change that changed the course of history, when Al Gore won the popular vote by more than a half million, and with the economy having improved during the Clinton years, should have led to Gore in the White House.

In 2008, Barack Obama’s victory over John McCain was a sharp turn to the left after what were arguably 40 years of conservative government to different degrees, including under Democrats Jimmy Carter and Bill Clinton, and Obama overcame the race issue, in becoming the first African American President.

And now, in 2016, Donald Trump’s victory MIGHT be a sign of another “change” election, with the white working class voting for Trump, giving him the victory in the Electoral College, even though rival Hillary Clinton won the biggest popular vote margin of a losing candidate (2.85 million), greater than many Presidents won on their road to the White House,

But it may eventually be seen as a “fluke” election, and may not be long lasting, and only time and events will tell us what the reality is.

Time For “A New Generation Of Leadership” For Democrats Running For The Presidency

The Democratic Party needs “new blood” running for President in 2020, just as it had in John F. Kennedy in 1960; Jimmy Carter in 1976; Bill Clinton in 1992; and Barack Obama in 2008.

This is not the time for “old” leadership, meaning another run for the White House by Hillary Clinton or Joe Biden. Anyone reading this blog knows of my great admiration for Biden, but at age 78 in 2020, it is too late, in the author’s opinion, for him to be a serious alternative. And as much as Hillary Clinton has an exceptional background, having run for President twice, and being still seen by many as a divisive figure, and being 73 in 2020, it is proper to say that her time has passed.

It is also NOT the time for Bernie Sanders, who despite his strong support, is not really a cooperative member of the Democratic Party, not having been a member until he decided to run for President, and now backing away again from membership in the party. His age in 2020, 79, also makes him far from a good choice for such a demanding job.

What about Elizabeth Warren? She will be 71 in 2020 and is an inspiring person, but the problem of misogyny that Hillary Clinton faced, which was a factor in her defeat, argues against Warren, as she has been cast in a negative light by many, for her vehement and outspoken manner. This blogger admires her, but finds it hard to believe she could win in the 2020 Presidential race.

So basically, what we need is someone not thought about before, and there are a multitude of candidates one can think of to consider for 2020.

Senator Tim Kaine of Virginia, (62 in 2020) )Hillary Clinton’s Vice Presidential running mate, is one, as is his fellow Virginian, Senator Mark Warner (65 in 2020). But both are seen by many as too moderate centrist, not appealing to the Bernie Sanders supporters in 2016.

There is Senator Sherrod Brown of Ohio, (68 in 2020), who was thought of as an alternative running mate for Clinton, and who might have helped keep the white working class in Ohio and elsewhere for the Democrats in 2016.

There is also Senator Chris Murphy of Connecticut, who would be 47 in 2020, and comes across as very appealing in appearance and views on the issues.

Then, there is Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey, who would be 51 in 2020, but is seen as too centrist by many, and being African American, after the racism so evident during the term of Barack Obama, one wonders if that would be a problem.

And there are also Senator Amy Klobuchar of Minnesota (60 in 2020)and Senator Kirsten Gillibrand of New York (54 in 2020), but being females might be a negative factor, sad to say.

Additionally, there is Senator Jeff Merkley of Oregon (64 in 2020), the only Democrat to endorse Bernie Sanders in 2016.

Less likely possibilities include Senator Chris Coons of Delaware (57 in 2020); Senator Al Franken of Minnesota (69 in 2020); Senator Kamala Harris of California (56 in 2020); and Senator Sheldon Whitehouse of Rhode Island (65 in 2020).

Other than the US Senate, the only possible gubernatorial Presidential possibilities that seem reasonable are New York Governor Andrew Cuomo (62 in 2020), and California Lieutenant Governor and likely next Governor Gavin Newsom (53 in 2020), former Mayor of San Francisco.

Trying to figure out this early who might indeed run is really difficult, but one can assume that a good number of these 18 possibilities will actually enter the Presidential race.

First thoughts on this would be that Chris Murphy, Cory Booker, Amy Klobuchar, Andrew Cuomo, and Gavin Newsom would have the best chance, with all likely to be candidates. All are young enough, and have a record of accomplishment worthy of consideration. But also, it is likely that Mark Warner, Sherrod Brown, and Elizabeth Warren will also announce for President, and others might as well.

Of course, someone not yet thought of, who might be elected to the governorship or the Senate in 2018, might be added to the list.

And, one cannot eliminate someone from outside the political system, likely a businessman or media or entertainment star, could enter the race, and one cannot project against such a person having a real chance to be the Democratic Presidential nominee.

One must recall that John F. Kennedy had the issue of Catholicism that was a problem; Jimmy Carter the Southern issue and basically unknown nationally; Bill Clinton having the ethics and morality issue; and Barack Obama having the racial problem.

No one would have predicted three years before their elections that any of them would have been the nominee of the party, let alone the next Presidency of the United States!

Donald Trump Delusional: North Carolina, Florida, Nevada, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Colorado, Michigan, Wisconsin, Virginia All Gone

Donald Trump is totally delusional, running all over the nation, claiming he is winning, when it is assured he will lose big time in tomorrow’s election!

Trump seems to think he will win North Carolina, Florida, Nevada, Pennsylvania, New Hampshire, Colorado, Michigan, Wisconsin, and Virginia, but they are all gone!

Trump will have trouble keeping “Red” states, including Arizona, Utah, and even Texas, and is assured to lose North Carolina, which went for Barack Obama in 2008 but for Mitt Romney in 2012.

Trump will have to keep all “Red” states, and win all “Swing” states too, or take a “Blue” state, and anyone who is betting on all that is a fool!

The surging Latino vote and women’s vote insures that Trump will lose Florida, and that will be, effectively, the end of the election before November 8 ends!

Final Projections On Electoral College And Presidential Election Of 2016

Ok, the time has arrived for my final projection on the Presidential election of 2016.

I project that all Barack Obama states will go to Hillary Clinton, except for Iowa–25 of 26 states in 2012–18 “Blue” states plus DC, and 7 “swing” or “purple” states. Iowa would be the only “swing” or “purple” state that would go “Red”.

At the same time, two “Red” or Romney states–North Carolina and Arizona–would swing to the Democrats.

The math means 6 votes are subtracted from Iowa for Clinton, while 26 electoral votes are added to Clinton’s side, with 15 electoral votes from North Carolina and 11 electoral votes from Arizona.

So instead of 332 electoral votes for Obama, the final total for Clinton will be 352, against 186 for Donald Trump as compared to 206 for Romney.

Hillary Clinton would have 27 states to 23 for Trump, as compared to 24 for Romney, so gain of one state for the Democrats.

We shall see how accurate I am in this third round of Presidential Projections after 2008 and 2012.

A more detailed article has been published on History News Network yesterday, and is now posted on this blog as well, on the right hand side!

Looking Back At My Projections on the Presidential Races Of 2008 And 2012

As I am about to project the Presidential race of 2016, it is a good idea to look back at my projections on this blog in 2008 and 2012.

In 2008, I projected a final electoral vote of 364-174 and 28 states, and I was only off by ONE electoral vote, as I projected the state of Missouri with 10 electoral votes would go for Barack Obama over John McCain, rather than Indiana with 11 electoral votes! So by winning Indiana, and not Missouri, Barack Obama won the Electoral College with 365-173.

In 2012, I projected a final electoral vote of 332-206 and 26 states, and was totally correct that Obama would defeat Mitt Romney!

So I hope I will be totally accurate this time, when I announce my projection tomorrow!

So for two elections, I was off by only ONE electoral vote, assuming wrongly that Missouri, not Indiana, would go for Obama in 2008!

Early Florida Voting Returns: 53 Percent For Clinton And 28 Percent Republicans Voting For Clinton!

An astounding development emerged last night on MSNBC’s Lawrence O’Donnell show, with information about early voting in Florida, showing that 53 percent of early voters have supported Hillary Clinton, to Donald Trump’s 40 percent, a literal landslide!

But also, 28 percent of Republicans have voted for Hillary Clinton, as compared to 6 percent for John Kerry in 2004 and 9 percent for Barack Obama in 2008.

If this trend continues, Donald Trump is done, as he cannot win the Presidency if he loses Florida, and right now, he is losing in a massive landslide!

The feeling is developing that Hillary Clinton is on the road to an overwhelming landslide nationally, but still subject to revision.

A Hillary Clinton Alliance With Bernie Sanders And Elizabeth Warren For Progressive Change After The Election

There are many progressives who are skeptical about Hillary Clinton’s commitment to progressive reform. They seem willing to allow Donald Trump to be elected, which is suicidal behavior.

That is unacceptable behavior, although it is understandable that Hillary Clinton’s husband, Bill Clinton, was far from a great progressive in his time, and this blogger has well expressed that reality over the years.

Readers of this blog know that the author was and is a Joe Biden fan, which also may not please the most left wing progressives.

But this blogger believes that insisting on purity is the road to disaster, as when progressives found Hubert Humphrey unacceptable in 1968, giving us Richard Nixon; and when progressives found Al Gore unacceptable in 2000, giving us George W. Bush.

For this nation to elect a far left progressive is never going to happen, and the way forward is incremental reform, as the right wing forces are not going away, and have great power and influence.

So there are those who would say Barack Obama was not progressive enough, but imagine if we had ended up with John McCain or Mitt Romney.

This blogger believes that Hillary Clinton will be committed to progressive reform when she is President, and that she will have an alliance with Bernie Sanders and Elizabeth Warren, but a lot depends on electing a Democratic Senate and narrowing the Republican control of the House of Representatives.

Time To Confront Newt Gingrich And Rudy Giuliani On Media For Their Invoking Bill Clinton, When Their Own Behavior Is Equally Horrible!

One of the most obnoxious developments of the Presidential campaign is Newt Gingrich, former Speaker of the House, and Rudy Giuliani, former NYC Mayor, both with scandalous private lives, clear womanizers, extreme misogynists, speaking up to defend Donald Trump’s obscene statements and behavior regarding women.

All three have been married three times and have cheated on their wives while married, and most likely, are still cheating on their present third wives.

All three are the lowest of the low, breaking up families, harming their children no matter how much the children might deny it, while Bill Clinton, despite his totally reprehensible behavior, kept his family together, and remains, despite his terrible behavior, in love with his wife.

In many ways, the Bill and Hillary Clinton marriage reminds us of the Franklin and Eleanor Roosevelt marriage, with its ups and downs, but real basic love for each other very obvious.

For Gingrich and Giuliani in 2012 and 2008, respectively, to have run for President with their disgraceful private life, as Trump has now, and yet to criticize Hillary Clinton, is the height of hypocrisy.

Kudos to Fox News Channel’s Megyn Kelly for NOT allowing Gingrich to bully her, but of course, Trump went ahead and applauded Gingrich for attacking her, and the effect is to make a mass movement of women abandoning the Republican Party this November, and possibly, for the long term, until and when the GOP no longer endorses misogyny and bad personal behavior in its candidates and its members in the Congress and in the states.

More media people need to openly confront Gingrich, Giuliani,and Trump directly about their behavior, and put them on the defensive. Kudos to Anderson Cooper of CNN for already doing so!

We cannot allow bullies to get away with their actions and behavior, and the American people would salute media personalities, like Cooper, who challenge openly the hypocrisy of these characters!

Trump Support Hemorraghing Rapidly In “Red” States!

Three weeks to go until the Presidential Election of 2016, and it seems clear, by public opinion polls,that Donald Trump’s support in “Red” states is hemorrhaging rapidly.

His mishandling of the sexual assault allegations has turned many Republicans against him, and his condemnation of Republican leadership, including Speaker of the House Paul Ryan, is damaging his ability even to hold on to the loyal Republican states.

So we have evidence that the following states are possible pick ups by Hillary Clinton:

North Carolina
Georgia
Arizona
Utah
Indiana
Missouri
South Carolina
Texas
Alaska
Mississippi
Kansas
Nebraska (or at least the Omaha area)

One can be quite certain that many of these states will, in the end, still back Donald Trump, but by a much smaller margin than for Mitt Romney in 2012 or John McCain in 2008.

But the first four on the above list look ripe for being picked up by Hillary Clinton and the Democrats.

I will post an entry close to the election on my final projections, and I remind my readers that, independent of Nate Silver in 2012, I projected, as he did, the precise electoral vote distribution-332-206.

I also will publish my projection on History News Network, and will be on radio with Jon Grayson of CBS St Louis, KMOX 1120 AM, Overnight with Jon Grayson, one of the radio shows I have been on, and posted on the right side of the blog, on Election Night at 1 AM ET on November 9, a few hours after the polls have closed, to comment on the results.

Marco Rubio And John McCain In Trouble As Hillary Clinton Gains in Florida And Arizona

Marco Rubio and John McCain are in trouble as Hillary Clinton gains in Florida and Arizona.

Rubio, who was humiliated by Donald Trump in the Florida GOP Presidential primary, only winning his home county of Miami-Dade, and had the worst attendance record in the Senate, and said he did not like being a Senator, now wants to come back.

But Patrick Murphy, the Democratic Congressman challenging him, is edging closer in polls, as Hillary Clinton seems very likely to win the state, with more Democratic registration, particularly with Puerto Ricans from the island migrating in large numbers in last couple of years to Orlando and other areas of Central Florida.

McCain, always seen as insufficiently conservative by many in Arizona, is witnessing a growing likelihood that Clinton could win Arizona, with increased numbers of Hispanic and Latino voters, and his race against Ann Kirkpatrick, Congresswoman from the First District, being very close in the polls. So after 30 years in the US Senate, and being the nominee of the party for President in 2008, McCain, at age 80, may face mandatory retirement in November!