Network News

X My Profile
View More Activity

Florida Prediction Winners

We asked the Fix community on Tuesday to predict the winners of that night's Florida Republican primary. And predict you did! More than 320 predictions were registered -- a new record!

In the early hours of the vote counting, the race looked like a nip-and-tuck affair (as expected) between Sen. John McCain (Ariz.) and former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney. But as the night wore on, McCain widened his margin (thank you Miami-Dade county!) and went on to a 36 percent to 31 percent triumph over Romney. Former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani, who ended his candidacy on Wednesday and backed McCain, placed third with 15 percent.

Lots of readers accurately predicted McCain's win at 36 percent: "06csg", "AndyR3", "jbritt3", "davidrocker", "jobie", "Stonecreek", "f_krueger", "dd1101a", "jwright012" and "esmerelda123". No one accurately predicted the fortunes of the top three candidates, but "dd1101a" came close.

"Dd1101a" missed Romney and Giuliani's marks, but only by one percentage point for each. Here's the winning prediction:

McCain 36
Romney 30
Giuliani 14

As for the storyline, TONS of people guessed that McCain would win and Giuliani would bow out. But "mesondk" came the closest -- to our mind. "Late endorsements by Crist and Martinez propel McCain to victory and cement his role as favorite of the Republican establishment; Giuliani drops out and endorses McCain," read the prediction.

And just because, we also wanted to reward "naylorben" for this gem: "McCain seals the deal; proposes radical change to health care plan- names JT3 health advisor, and calls for funding to help protect heart attack prone Hoya fans like Cillizza and naylorben."

Congratulations to the winners! If you are one of the three, make sure to send me an email at chris DOT cillizza AT washingtonpost DOT com with your preferred size and mailing address.

By Chris Cillizza  |  February 1, 2008; 5:00 PM ET
Categories:  Eye on 2008  
Save & Share:  Send E-mail   Facebook   Twitter   Digg   Yahoo Buzz   Del.icio.us   StumbleUpon   Technorati   Google Buzz   Previous: The Line on Running Mates
Next: '08 Hopefuls To Talk With MTV, MySpace and The Fix

Comments

Should have had a contest for the Florida Democratic primary. Over 1.5 million voters who came out to defy threats that their votes will not be counted are too many to ignore. Florida- You deserve better treatment.

Posted by: holler1wv | February 2, 2008 8:42 PM | Report abuse

Clarification on my last Post. I missed voting in 1972 and would have voted for Nixon. My first vote was for JFK in 1960 while I was in the AF.

Posted by: lylepink | February 2, 2008 5:28 PM | Report abuse

I mean the only election I did not vote was 1972, my first vote was for JFK in 1960 while I was in the AF. I moved and did not have the required time to be eligible, but I would have voted for Nixon.

Posted by: lylepink | February 2, 2008 5:22 PM | Report abuse

optimyst: Each and everyone of those elected POTUS is what I am talking about. The only election I missed was 1972. I do not vote on my "Feeling" of who is going to win, and have voted for a bunch of losers. This is where I think you are missing what I am saying. Intuition, as I understand it, means to sense something without reasoning why or what it is. Logic, is reasoning given known or perceived facts. I know it is hard for me to get you well educated folks to understand what I am trying to say, since I only completed one year of High School, and do not communicate well with you folks that seem to lack any knowledge about the subject.

Posted by: lylepink | February 2, 2008 5:15 PM | Report abuse

My predictions, for whatever they're worth...


-Alabama: Obama 51, Clinton 49.
-Alaska: Clinton 60, Obama 40.
-Arizona: Clinton 52, Obama 48.
-Arkansas: Clinton 53, Obama 47.
-California: Obama 51, Clinton 49.
-Colorado: Obama 52, Clinton 48.
-Connecticut: Obama 51, Clinton 49.
-Delaware: Clinton 53, Obama 47.
-Georgia: Obama 54, Clinton 46.
-Idaho: Obama 51, Clinton 49.
-Illinois: Obama 65, Clinton 35.
-Kansas: Obama 51, Clinton 49.
-Massachusetts: Clinton 52, Obama 48.
-Minnesota: Clinton 51, Obama 49.
-Missouri: Obama 51, Clinton 49.
-New Jersey: Clinton 51, Obama 49.
-North Dakota: Clinton 53, Obama 47.
-New Mexico: Clinton 54, Obama 46.
-New York: Clinton 53, Obama 47.
-Oklahoma: Obama 51, Clinton 49.
-Tennessee: Clinton 51, Obama 49.
-Utah: Clinton 52, Obama 48.

Too close to call, or to concede. I, too, like Obama's chances in Louisiana, Nebraska, Washington, Maryland, D.C., Virginia, Hawaii, Ohio and Texas. These states will vote between Feb. 9th and March 4th. I suspect that we'll know our nominee by March 5th.

New Yorkers for Obama.

Posted by: legan00 | February 2, 2008 4:29 PM | Report abuse

That's fine, Mr. Pink. I respect your intuition, just don't label it logic.

Now, some questions to illuminate this gift of yours. It appears this time that your intuition has led you to a candidate you wholeheartedly support. Lucky for you. What have you done in past elections when your intuition told you the "other guy" was going to win? Did you give up and not vote? Or did you yield to your intuition and rationalize to yourself that it made sense to support George HW Bush in 1988, but then switch Bill Clinton in 1992. And if that's what you did, then did you conclude that your intuition made a mistake in 1988 because George HW Bush didn't have what it took to be a two term president (which is another way of saying that his presidency was somewhat of a failure)?

And when your intuition led you to KNOW that Bush would get re-elected in 2004, did you say to your crystal ball, "How can this be? Please, please, be wrong this time." Or are you voting for Hillary to continue the policies of the current administration. Is that what your crystal ball is telling you? Aren't you troubled by the fact that the quality of the presidents your intuition has brought to power these last 60 years has been spotty, to say the least? I wouldn't want that burden, my friend.

Finally, am I to understand that without fail your intuition picked these presidents: Truman, Eisenhower, Eisenhower, Kennedy, Johnson, Nixon, Nixon, Carter, Reagan, Reagan, Bush, Clinton, Clinton, Bush (amazing prescience of what the Supreme Court would decide), Bush.

Please answer these questions. All it takes is logic.

Posted by: optimyst | February 2, 2008 4:10 PM | Report abuse

optimyst: I go back to 1948, when I had a "Feeling" about Harry S. Truman being elected POTUS. Every four years since then I have had this "Feeling" about who would be our next elected POTUS, each and every time I have picked the winner even before it was know who would even be running. I have said many times that I do not understand this myself, but it works. Over the years I have been reluctant to discuess this with even close friends for they would think I had lost my mind. When I did finally mention this some 20 to 25 years ago, I was surprised to find some have had the same expierence, and they also could not understand what was happening.

Posted by: lylepink | February 2, 2008 2:40 PM | Report abuse

My friend Mr. Pink,

What I want to happen is for Obama to win, both the nomination and the presidency. At this point, however, I would have to say he is behind, trending upwards, but with scant time to overcome Hillary. I hope he will emerge from Super Tuesday with at least a draw so that he will be able to continue to introduce himself to the American people and scrounge for every delegate until he reaches the magic 2,025.

Being a somewhat analytical CPA, there is nothing in my wishes that makes me underestimate the strengths of Hillary. And being politically aware and interested since the 1960's, I believe I have some historical perspective from which to comment on these matters. When I do, unless it is in the form of a mathematical equation (1+1=2) then what I offer is an opinion, which you may accept or reject at your discretion with or without comment.

Your comments can be a burr under my saddle because on one hand you will say: "My advantage over you youngsters is my "CRYSTAL BALL" along with my "Feeling" about things that come to me out of the blue." This obviously describes your intuition. While I will be the last one to denigrate intuition as a useful tool, it does fall short of an objective measuring process one might reason out in his brain. It's a gut thing, so when you further state: "Try and look at the LOGIC of my position..." you are completely confusing intuition and logic. They are different things entirely. I am more than willing to compete in the arena of logic, but you wish to play by the rules of your gut and call it logic. There's a word for that. It's called "cheating."

Your intuition can prove fruitful in the end. Hillary may indeed win. But it won't prove she is more formidable, because Obama would not have had his chance. Sometimes Lady Luck will blow on our dice, fluffer that she sometimes is, but to label your fanciful opinions as fact or logic distorts the character of this discourse, my friend.

Posted by: optimyst | February 2, 2008 1:59 PM | Report abuse

optimyst: My advantage over you youngsters is my "CRYSTAL BALL" along with my "Feeling" about things that come to me out of the blue. Over many years I have learned not to ignore these two things that have served me well. I have used it for some stock picks, and have always made money in the stock market whenever I have invested. Try and look at the LOGIC of my position, not what you want or would like to happen, this is where you cannot see what is obvious, and only what you want to see.

Posted by: lylepink | February 2, 2008 12:46 PM | Report abuse

The lovable, harmless, fuzz ball Lylepink writes: "The only way you cannot see this trend is something you do not want to see. The LOGIC of what I am saying has PROVEN to be amazingly accurate."

I used to have a college math professor just like this. No matter what clarifications we students asked for when his explanations did not illuminate his point and get us to a eureka moment, his response was invariably a haughty "It is intuitively obvious."

Despite the fact that no exit poll ever asked the question "Are you a voter who usually votes republican and wishes a republican to be elected, but have decided to vote for Obama in this primary because he would be the easiest for a republican to beat in November?" Mr. Pink continues to maintain his certitude without any linkage to fact whatsoever. This is fine on Fantasy Island, or even here in America if it is labeled opinion.

He prattles on the Obama has ZERO CHANCE of getting elected, yet the In-trade futures market system where people wager on the outcome show Clinton with a 60/40 chance of gaining the nomination. Those 40 points for Obama earned by the vote of dollars in the marketplace of ideas are no match for the pure thought and certainty Mr. Pink dispenses here. No doubt he's made easy millions through the power of his intellect.

And on Fantasy Island apparently the news does not get through that Obama has consistently run better in head to head polls than Clinton against the republicans. Obviously, information that conflicts with what is intuitively obvious must be ignored.

So, my friends, please give our oracle, Mr. Pink, his due. Just like our current president, he's resolute no matter the score, happy to retreat into the bubble of his own certainty, always ready to "stay the course." It is admirable, really, in a Fantasy Island kinda way. Just don't run with scissors, Mr. Pink.

Posted by: optimyst | February 2, 2008 11:26 AM | Report abuse

jimd52: I thought I had answered about the polling. Again, I think most polling at this stage is highly suspect as we have seen recently. The Repubs for Obama showed this in SC about a week ago where my estimate of at least 10% throughout the caucus and primary voters for Obama would be Repubs trying to stop Hillary. The only way you cannot see this trend is something you do not want to see. The LOGIC of what I am saying has PROVEN to be amazingly accurate.

Posted by: lylepink | February 2, 2008 10:46 AM | Report abuse

lyle - you still haven't answered this question: why do all the polls show Obama performing better against the Republicans than HRC?

Posted by: jimd52 | February 2, 2008 8:56 AM | Report abuse

The Fix be the home of geeks and whizzes
Who sometimes talk fluffers and left handed scissors
But a tee shirt fixation
Has overrun this blog nation
Oh what we'd do for a Fix tee that's Cillizza's

Posted by: optimyst | February 2, 2008 12:43 AM | Report abuse

Boko & JimD: This "Thing" will be more evident to you guys after Super Dooper Tuesday if you will only open your eyes.

Posted by: lylepink | February 1, 2008 11:58 PM | Report abuse

Lyle, what you're describing sounds like a gigantic... no, that's not the word.... 'huge'? 'enormous'? 'massive'? anyway, a...sizable conservative... no, 'right wing'... a grandiose right wing... no, that's not quite it... VAST!!! a "vast right wing...." uh, plot? secret society? cabal?

Help me out here, Lyle... we have to warn Hillary!

Posted by: bokonon13 | February 1, 2008 11:27 PM | Report abuse

jimd52: I have personal Repub friends and they are telling me this. Giving money to the Obama campaign , etc...Use a little LOGIC. The Repubs are salivating to run against Hillary is exactly, precisely, undoubtable, and any other word you may choose to use, is what they want you to believe, and it simply is NOT TRUE. Only time will tell.

Posted by: lylepink | February 1, 2008 10:59 PM | Report abuse

my proven theory of the Repubs backing Barack to stop Hillary from getting the nomination, and in effect guaranteing at least another four years of a Repub White House. I see this on a daily basis, and wonder why so few others do not.

Posted by: lylepink | February 1, 2008 09:01 PM

Proven??? In your dreams, I have posed this question to you several times and have never gotten an answer - why do all the polls show Obama performing better against the Republicans than HRC? Why do the Republican pundits who are never shy about saying what they think almost unanimously say the GOP would LOVE to run against Hillary. The idea that there is some clandestine Republican conspiracy to help Obama get the Democratic nomination is simply ridiculous.

Posted by: jimd52 | February 1, 2008 9:51 PM | Report abuse

rfpiktor: I am still of the opinion, Barack Obama has ZERO chance of being elected POTUS in 2008. I am in a distinct minority of Posters on this Blog. These recent newspaper endorsemenys, including The LATimes, first since 1972, are even more indictive of my proven theory of the Repubs backing Barack to stop Hillary from getting the nomination, and in effect guaranteing at least another four years of a Repub White House. I see this on a daily basis, and wonder why so few others do not.

Posted by: lylepink | February 1, 2008 9:01 PM | Report abuse

Mark, I usually side with Republicans. I am surprised at myself for rooting for Obama.

I think it is because he reminds me of JFK. The once in a generation thing and all that.

Have you seen his $ numbers:

http://politics.nytimes.com/election-guide/2008/finances/index.html

Click on Obama and then on the "details" window

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 1, 2008 8:34 PM | Report abuse

I note that my plaintiff lawyer friends are mainly moving from JRE to BHO.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 1, 2008 8:22 PM | Report abuse

rfpiktor - I vote D more often than I vote R, but I am an Indie. I voted for GWB for Gov. TX in '98 but thought he was not up to being Prez so I voted for Gore, willingly, and Kerry, very unwillingly.

I would have voted for McC in 2000 if I had that choice. I liked Bradley more than Gore. Bradley was a proponent of open government.
-----------------------------------------
I believe in process in politics, and I think BHO and McC are process oriented. I am a lawyer and I am concerned about killing the snake called "unitary executive". McC is outspoken on this. BHO is inferentially "good" on this issue too and was a constitutional law prof, a good thing. HRC hedges on this issue.

Move.on wrote that ad insulting the honesty of Petraeus before he had even testified.
That to me was no better than the Coulter/Rush daily assault on reasoned discourse. The cure for speech you do not agree with is more speech, not shouting down your opponent.

Being the most liberal or the most conservative voice is not a recommendation to me. Working across the aisle is.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 1, 2008 7:55 PM | Report abuse

Woe is me!
I'm feeling very hurt
I'm sad you see
Cuz' I didn't win a Fix T-shirt

I thought I would
(that isn't true)
I knew I could
(perhaps I'll sue)

But alas!
It was not to be
but hey!
at least I played for free

AJB

Posted by: anthonyjbrady | February 1, 2008 7:38 PM | Report abuse

Woe is me!
I'm feeling very hurt
I'm sad you see
Because I didn't win a Fix T-shirt

I thought I would
I knew I could

But alas!
It was not to be
But hey!
At least I played for free

Posted by: anthonyjbrady | February 1, 2008 7:32 PM | Report abuse

Woe is me!
I'm feeling very hurt
I'm sad you see
Because I didn't win a T-shirt

I thought I would
I knew I could

But alas!
It was not to be
But hey at least I played for free

Posted by: anthonyjbrady | February 1, 2008 7:27 PM | Report abuse

claudialong | February 1, 2008 06:10 PM

It will be there sometimes, only sometimes.

Always copy.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 1, 2008 6:14 PM | Report abuse

Mark, I'm guessing you vote Republican.

Democrat Gen Xers love these guys. The choir loves to be preached to and MoveOn is nothing but added sugar to their liberal sweet tooth.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 1, 2008 6:12 PM | Report abuse

'Now if we could just make the freaking scissors work.'

indeed, the bane. pens not so good either... all the smudgies.

VDH needs professional help alright, not sure if a proofreader is enough, however...

for all whose posts get eaten, always copy before submitting, andif that fails, go back to last screen, your message will be there...

Posted by: drindl | February 1, 2008 6:10 PM | Report abuse

Biggest-Ever Primary Day Super Tuesday

Will you be voting in a Primary or Caucus on Super Tuesday?


http://www.youpolls.com/details.asp?pid=1682


.

Posted by: PollM | February 1, 2008 5:59 PM | Report abuse

The Rs are going to point to BHO's newly minted "most liberal Senator" title.

The love from MoveOn is akin to shipping coals to Newcastle.

Posted by: mark_in_austin | February 1, 2008 5:59 PM | Report abuse

So did Alma Rangel, Charles Rangel's [hillary supporter] wife.
The LA times also endorsed Obama today!

Obama Supporter Map: http://www.obamaworldwide.com/SupporterMap.aspx

Posted by: ObamaForPrez | February 1, 2008 5:57 PM | Report abuse

MoveOn has endorsed Obama. Billary what say you now.

Posted by: rfpiktor | February 1, 2008 5:43 PM | Report abuse

Not to try and interrupt the hustle and bustle and constant trumpeting of Clinton and Obama that's been going on for the past six months, but how about them Congressional races? Been a while since we've seen a line for them

Posted by: riff_raff17 | February 1, 2008 5:23 PM | Report abuse

The comments to this entry are closed.

 
 
RSS Feed
Subscribe to The Post

© 2010 The Washington Post Company