I Think [candidate] will win in the primaries for their respective parties:

[nfinityi]

Political poll.

[sandwich]

This is without a doubt the year for Nader.

[Oso Mocoso]

Ouch.

I was asked in front of a bunch of women in my family about who I'd vote for from among the available candidates. In my family, for whatever reason most gatherings tend to be something like 75% women.

I picked Obama.

Then, my wife (of all people) said to me "You'd vote for a black guy before a woman?!?"

I replied "No, I'd vote for this particular black guy before I'd vote for Hillary Clinton. It's not like it's just any black guy and any particular woman."

The conversation went against me. If we're talking Republicans, I'd definitely vote McCain.

[songbird36]

I think probably Obama and McCain. McCain because there is a lack of other serious Republican contenders.

[demagogic_schizoid]

Republicans - are they even trying this year?

Democrats - John Edwards is a hedge-funder btw, I found that quite funny, a lot of people across the spectrum will hate him for that.

Obama or Hillary? I think, knowing that their base will come out to support them out of fear of a President Romney or Giuliani, that the Dems will play it safe and go with Hillary, as a centre-groung candidate, hell she could even qualify as a "national unity" candidate given how close to the Republicans she is on most issues. Why rock the boat with a "radical" like Obama when you've already got your 50% sewn up, and stand a good chance of grabbing a large part of the other side's vote with the right (literally) candidate? Plus, being a woman (even part of a super-rich dynasty) offsets Obama being black.

What else? oh yeah, Obama is young, they will reason that he can retire from this race with a lot of political capital, and come to save their asses when Hillary fucks up...the ENRON-capitalism era begun under the last Clinton anyway, so how fitting if the chickens finally come home to roost under this one?

[Titania]

I'm picking Obama. Yeah, there's a good number of people who like Hilary, but there's a good percent of people who really really hate the woman for her track record across the political spectrum. Obama's critics don't have anything truly vicious to harp on which doesn't come across as just vicious.

The republicans need to get their stuff together. I don't think McCaine will get it, he appeals to very liberal republicans (not centrist, actually liberal, although he's most definitely not a Democrat), and the conservatives probably won't find much to get into with him.

I think it's going to be Romney who gets the nomination. He's probably the only one charismatic and pretty enough to take on Obama or Hilary. He also brings along the religious nut vote with him, which the Republicans have been particularly pandering to last two or three elections.

[immortalmack]

I think Hilary is going to win. I don't think the Dems will gamble on Obama.

[Jennywocky]

So who do the repubs have again, who is viable / in front?
Huckabee, McCain, and Romney?

I don't know if Huckabee's evangelicalism will hurt or hinder him as the caucus goes national. Romney's having trouble, he's the dark horse. The party seems skeptical of McCain, who likes to be seen as the "included outsider." They might end up with him, though, if things continue, since Guliani has fallen from apparent grace...

The dems are obviously down to Obama or Hillary.

I really hate all the new coverage because they influence the voting. There is no reason idealistically for it to matter why someone wins Iowa; everyone should be voting their mind, regardless of what happens elsewhere. But it does have an impact, partly because modern media coverage is so extensive and immediate.

It's rather sickening that it's all treated like one large game, because idealistically the winner shouldn't be the better "game player"... but then again, isn't the political system just a large game anyway? In that sense, the most victorious game player is getting elected, regardless of their personal values.

Who is nominated really depends on who is doing the voting. The younger demographic is now connecting more with Obama, but the older demographic is going for Hillary. Hillary's the safe choice, Obama is resonating more on change. I really don't know enough about the voting constituency to be sure, but I'm still leaning towards Hillary.

Let us say that McCain wins the nom. Who would do better against him? I'm inclined to think that Obama's youth plays against him, against McCain. Against Huck or Rom, not as much.

[nfinityi]

Mike Huckabee is a joke and will never win the nomination. He has no foreign policy experience.

...As a matter of fact, when asked about foreign policy in an interview, he replied, "I don't know much about foreign policy, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night."

We're all laughing on the inside, truely.

[songbird36]

Republicans - are they even trying this year?


I think you hit the nail on the head here. In the press coverage here, and even in TIME which I subscribe to, it's been all about the Democratic race, and very little about the 'Pubs. Either it's a one-horse race to the finish line in November, or the Republican line-up is so dull and colorless that nobody wants to put the energy into describing them or picking winners. I tend to think the first explanation is the right one :)

[immortalmack]

Let us say that McCain wins the nom. Who would do better against him? I'm inclined to think that Obama's youth plays against him, against McCain. Against Huck or Rom, not as much. Hilary is probably better to run against Mccain.


I think you hit the nail on the head here. In the press coverage here, and even in TIME which I subscribe to, it's been all about the Democratic race, and very little about the 'Pubs. Either it's a one-horse race to the finish line in November, or the Republican line-up is so dull and colorless that nobody wants to put the energy into describing them or picking winners. I tend to think the first explanation is the right one :)

The American Media..sorry,the American Voters are not feeling Republicans right now,but they're not dead.

[Works]

Mike Huckabee is a joke and will never win the nomination. He has no foreign policy experience.

...As a matter of fact, when asked about foreign policy in an interview, he replied, "I don't know much about foreign policy, but I did stay at a Holiday Inn Express last night."

We're all laughing on the inside, truely.

That didn't stop Bill Clinton, another former governor from Arkansas, from being elected. I agree that Huckabee is a joke though.

[C.J.Woolf]

Positions before being elected President or Vice President:

George W. Bush - governor
Bill Clinton - governor
George H. W. Bush - vice president, CIA director
Ronald Reagan - governor
Jimmy Carter - governor
Gerald Ford - congressman (succeeded as vice president)
Richard Nixon - vice president, congressman
Lyndon Johnson - senator (succeeded as vice president)
John F. Kennedy - senator
Dwight D. Eisenhower - general
Harry S Truman - congressman (succeeded as vice president)
Franklin D. Roosevelt - governor

Of the last five presidents, four governors. That's the highest executive office in the US short of President. I think executive experience is more valuable to a new president than foreign policy experience, and besides, what office gives one real foreign policy experience (don't talk to me of the Senate) and is a springboard to the presidency? (Besides CIA director, that is. ;))

[HilbertSpace]

I think Obama has a Kennedy-esque appeal that plays against Hillary's old-school insider appeal. I also think that fewer people actively dislike him than Hillary. Hillary's sole advantage seems to be people's opinion of her electability in the general election, something about which I have reservations, and which at best would be a self-fulfilling prophecy.

The Republican field in this election is as bland as the Democratic one has been in recent history. I'm a little curious about who's going to get to play Dukakis this year, but barring an unforseen upturn in the GOP's favor, I think it's the Dem's game to lose at this point.

[garak]

The republicans are all frightening and there is no clear leader right now.

The dems are all frightening as well, though Obama and Edwards are maybe 9s on the frightening scale, compared to Hillary's 10.

I can hardly think too hard about it without wanting to cry and move out to a remote wooded area.

[fripping]

so the question is basically who do americans look down on more: black people or women?

on the one hand it's a valiant effort to get someone other than a white dude in office, and on the other hand it's asking populism to go ahead and screw them over.

i really don't know.

[C.J.Woolf]

I also think that fewer people actively dislike [Obama] than Hillary.
Definitely. I fear that Clinton as a nominee will boost Republican turnout and hurt Democrats in down-ticket races. If she wins, it will be another 4-8 years of the right wing frothing at the mouth. (They must liken the Clintons to unstoppable zombies!) That wouldn't be so bad if Hillary was ruthless enough to crush the right wing, but she's not.

IMO, Hillary Clinton is the most unfairly characterized politician in the US. She's not the ogre she's made out to be.


Hillary's sole advantage seems to be people's opinion of her electability in the general election, something about which I have reservations, and which at best would be a self-fulfilling prophecy.
They said that Kerry was electable in 2004.


The Republican field in this election is as bland as the Democratic one has been in recent history.
You see bland, I see loons:

Giuliani - authoritarian loon
Huckabee - theocratic loon
Romney - "institutional" loon (Mormon)
McCain - possible borderline loon; is such a slave to his ambition that he swallowed the humiliations heaped upon him by Bush in 2000 and didn't fuck him over in 2004 when he had the chance

But then I'm a left-wing political blog junkie, so you can take that with a pillar of salt.


I'm a little curious about who's going to get to play Dukakis this year...
Funny you should say that. Google "Wayne Dumond". He's Huckabee's very own Willie Horton.

[oxyjen]

on the one hand it's a valiant effort to get someone other than a white dude in office, and on the other hand it's asking populism to go ahead and screw them over.


Yes, there are large groups of stupid people, and their votes count as much as non-stupid peoples'. Scary thought.

Case in point:
I talked with someone who attended the Republican caucus. During the period where people vote on what the State's Republican Party platform should be, someone put forth the position that "evolution should be considered a religion." And it passed 62-1, with him as the lone dissenter.

[C.J.Woolf]

Case in point:
I talked with someone who attended the Republican caucus. During the period where people vote on what the State's RNC platform should be, someone put forth that one position that "evolution should be considered a religion." And it passed 62-1, with him as the lone dissenter.
The Republican party was taken over by loons. It needs to be taken back, but it's going to take several election cycles of defeats to make it happen.

[HilbertSpace]

You see bland, I see loons:

Giuliani - authoritarian loon
Huckabee - theocratic loon
Romney - "institutional" loon (Mormon)
McCain - possible borderline loon; is such a slave to his ambition that he swallowed the humiliations heaped upon him by Bush in 2000 and didn't fuck him over in 2004 when he had the chance


I agree with these assessments. It's just that, in terms of charisma, I think that as a group and individually they make Paul Tsongas look like Bill Clinton (or Ronald Reagan, take your pick). I see no real enthusiasm on the part of voters for any of the candidates (with the exception of Ron Paul, who probably won't make it past Super Tuesday).

My suspicion is that this election is going to be less driven by turnout of the core constituencies than turnout among independents, and I see that going largely in favor of the Dems (although possibly less with Hillary than with Obama).

[C.J.Woolf]

It's just that, in terms of charisma, I think that as a group and individually they make Paul Tsongas look like Bill Clinton (or Ronald Reagan, take your pick). I see no real enthusiasm on the part of voters for any of the candidates (with the exception of Ron Paul, who probably won't make it past Super Tuesday).
Ah, charisma. I agree with you there. However, there is one Republican candidate who does generate real enthusiasm: Huckabee, with the Christian Right.


My suspicion is that this election is going to be less driven by turnout of the core constituencies than turnout among independents, and I see that going largely in favor of the Dems (although possibly less with Hillary than with Obama).
Yep. The GOP has been telling independents for decades that Democrats govern badly and they convinced enough of them to win several elections, but the empirical evidence that Republicans govern badly (Katrina, Iraq, the deficit, etc.) speaks louder. The GOP is reduced to saying "Who are you gonna believe, me or your lying eyes?"

[oxyjen]

The Republican party was taken over by loons. It needs to be taken back, but it's going to take several election cycles of defeats to make it happen.

One could hope.

Christian Conservatives are crazy-organized and well-schooled in the area of groupthink which makes them pretty powerful politically.

Although Pat Robertson endorsed Guiliani, which could easily be the sign of Apocolyptic doom for the fundie political machine. :)

[HilbertSpace]

Ah, charisma. I agree with you there. However, there is one Republican candidate who does generate real enthusiasm: Huckabee, with the Christian Right.


I almost included him with Paul, but my real suspicion is that The Huckster would be the only candidate capable of a bigger "Whatever you do, cast a vote for the other person" effect than Hillary. If by some miracle Huckleberry got the GOP nod, it would be a blowout of biblical proportions.

If he does get elected, I reserve the right to delete this post for fear of KJV-wielding thought police knocking down my door.

[Shoot!]

Hillary Clinton just seems too fake for my tastes. And the active supporters I've seen of hers seem to be feminine fascists. Obama has my vote, mainly because he's the only candidate that seems to be making any kind of coherent sense as well as having a rather likeable personality. He seems to evoke an intelligent sort of aura.

[demagogic_schizoid]

so the question is basically who do americans look down on more: black people or women?

on the one hand it's a valiant effort to get someone other than a white dude in office, and on the other hand it's asking populism to go ahead and screw them over.

i really don't know.


closest to the mark comment so far.

[Karl]

Mike Gravel says he can still win.

[Shoot!]

Mike Gravel says he can still win.

That is the epitome of hilarity. I think the Democratic party pretty much completely hates him with alot of the harsh, but alot of times true stuff he has said. But I think alot of times when he is on the debates he just throws stuff out there to get some sort of attention. As a youtube commentator eloquently stated, "Mike, the amount of passion in your debates are inversely proportional to the amount of factual information you present."