Let's handicap the '08 race [Archive] - RonFez.net Messageboard

View Full Version : Let's handicap the '08 race

K.C.

01-16-2007, 05:39 PM

Ok, the list of Democrats, despite all the names being thrown around can be limited to five legitimate candidates at this point:-Barack Obama (Senator - IL)-Hillary Clinton (Senator - NY)-John Edwards (Former Senator - NC; former 2004 Vice Presidential Candidate)-Joe Biden (Senator - DE)-John Kerry (Senator - MA; former 2004 Presidential Candidate)On the Republican side, it's a little less clear, but I think you can whittle down the list to one of the following:-John McCain (Senator - AZ)-Rudy Giuliani (Former mayor of New York City)-Chuck Hagel (Senator - NE)-Mike Huckabee (Former Governor - AR)-Mitt Romney  (Former Governor - MA)-Newt Gingrich (Former rep. from GA; former Speaker of the House) Ok, now I'll throw two wild card on each side; people who probably won't run, but may make an impact if they decideDemocrats:-Al Gore (Former Senator - TN, Former Vice President; former Presidential Candidate 2000)-Wesley Clark (Former Supreme Allied Commander of NATO)Republicans: -Bill Frist (Former Senator - TN, Former Senate Majority Leader)-Condeleeza Rice (Secretary of State) Ok, now, what I've thought all along is the '08 election is not going to be a race of moderates, because I do not think a moderate candidate can survive the primary on either side. For the Democrats, I think it's either Hillary, Obama, or Edwards. Hillary's got the name recognition, but she could lose a lot of ground because of her stance on the war from within her party. Edwards on the other hand has position himself as far as appealing to the Democrat base. Obama, I could see either dropping out before a vote is cast, or never officially declaring. If you think about it, if he commits in '08 and takes a L in the primary, he may never get back his heat as a national political figure. On the other hand, if he puts his name out there among speculation for a few months, then declines to run, goes back to the senate and builds experience for himself, he'd boost his stock as a national politician and position himself as the front runner for '12 or '16. For the Republicans, whoever wins will only do so with the blessing of the evangelicals. So throw out guys like Giuliani and Romney. For me it comes down to Hagel, McCain, and Huckabee. Of those three, Huckabee would probably have the biggest sway among the Christians, although he's the least well known. McCain is the most electable on a national level, but is he going to have to sell himself out just to win the nomination thus alienating people come the national election?If I'm guessing at this date, my radio psychic (radio psychic) would be Edwards vs. Huckabee, which means a very traditional left vs. right type of election. And if it comes down to that, I think the Republicans are the underdogs in '08. I don't think they can win without a moderate, or at least the illusion of moderate candidate. 

This message was edited by K.C. on 1-16-07 @ 9:41 PM

Tenbatsuzen

01-16-2007, 06:00 PM

Doesn't Obama have enough of a handicap as is?

Snacks

01-16-2007, 07:51 PM

mmm I like most of your dem picksI think hillary scares too many people. Even though I like her policies I think too many people in red states hate her and some dems think shes too cold. For her to win she would need to win a lot of republican women voters.Obama is my favorite so far. I think some southern dems will be scared to vote him in due to him being black(stupid) Edwards is a wild card. I'm not a fan of him, I think he talks like a politician and I dont like people who cant give straight answers. He talks in circles.Kerry, forget it, he didnt stand up to bush the way he should have. Wehn he was atacked for his flip flopping he should have screamed blooody murder and fought that shitty swift boat asshole campaign. He was too timid so I do not want him.I do like Gore, his only mistake in 2000 was not using Clintons popularity to help him win. He walked away from him because he didnt want to be part of the monica scandal.My dark horse wild card and 2nd favorite and is about to take over as my favorite to obama is W Clark. He has military experience like no other. He knows what hes talking about, he never backs down to his critics. I would love to see him as a president VP, Secretary of state etc.I think dems have a better idea for all Americans they just dont know how to sell it and they are too politicly correct when they are attacked by the right. They need to stop playing in the middle and be upfront and speak their minds, even if the right doesnt like them or like their idea. They need to understand no matter what the right will never like what they have to say, so fuckem. Thats the one thing I think the right has done, they dont care if they are liked by people that will never vote for them anyway.I wanna see clark/obamaobama/clintoneither ticket would work for me!

westcoastcasey

01-16-2007, 10:26 PM

Tenbatsuzen wrote: Doesn't Obama have enough of a handicap as is?  He could be a sleeper cell.

PhishHead

01-17-2007, 02:28 AM

Obama needs more experience to have an impact, he has not done enough politically to even be considered in reality.  Yes he is a good speaker and can empower people but in all honesty what has he done in the senate or in any area of politics?

shamus mcfitzy

01-17-2007, 07:42 AM

Snacks wrote: Obama is my favorite so far. I think some southern dems will be scared to vote him in due to him being black(stupid) My dark horse wild card and 2nd favorite and is about to take over as my favorite to obama is W Clark. He has military experience like no other. He knows what hes talking about, he never backs down to his critics. I would love to see him as a president VP, Secretary of state etc. I think dems have a better idea for all Americans they just dont know how to sell it and they are too politicly correct when they are attacked by the right. They need to stop playing in the middle and be upfront and speak their minds, even if the right doesnt like them or like their idea. They need to understand no matter what the right will never like what they have to say, so fuckem. The way that the Democrats have broadened the party (chepened it really) so that they could have a symbolic majority I think that the new Democrat voter could just be stupid enough to discard Obama cause hes black. I'd like to think its not true, but deep down I know that its just possible. With that said I'm still supporting Edwards because I think a president should be a a slight bit slimy and talk like a politician. I always thought that Clark should've been a bigger part of Kerry's campaign in 2004. Not necessarilly the Vp candidate, but I certainly didn't see him enough to be satisfied. I would've voted for him in the primary in 04 if all hope hadn't been lost at that point. I think his 15 minutes are unfortunately up so i don't see him running and if he does he'll probably barely beat Kucinich. Hopefully, though, he will be a bigger piece of the Democratic campaign. I think the Democrats really do need to move left. I know it might be a little crazy because they're already labeled baby killers and gay lovers (begin gay Kerry-Edwards 04 photos i guess), but i think that they should go completely crazy and try to actually take the Nader vote back rather than complain that he steals their votes away. Frankly I think that they would have done just as well as in the past two elections if they played to the left, prolly no better or no worse, so it might be a little selfish, but I want a more liberal Democratic party.

K.C.

01-17-2007, 03:29 PM

Wesley Clark didn't get more heat in '04 because he announced too late and didn't run in Iowa. He was, however, one of the few candidates in that primary that actually won a state (Oklahoma). Pretty good for not running much of a campaign.   I like the guy, but I think he'd have trouble winning because he's a pretty conseverative guy for a Democrat. The only way I think he'd have a shot to pull it off is if the Democratic voters embrace the 'we can win Iraq under new leadership' view point. I think come primary time, though, most of the base will be looking for the candidate (that's not named Dennis Kucinich) advocating a strategic withdraw from Iraq. It's kind of insane to say anything is a given at this point since it's so early and things change in a matter of seconds and politics, but Edwards is the guy to beat in my opinion. While Obama and Hillary are racking up the "will they run" stories and drawing the ire of the Hannitys of the world, Edwards is the guy that's already committed himself and has been running all over Iowa and New Hampshire for a while now. I think people are going to see he's very quietly built a solid following in those states, and the first two primaries are usually the most important. Of course, people said that about Howard Dean too, and we all know how that turned out. 

This message was edited by K.C. on 1-17-07 @ 7:32 PM

Fezticle98

01-17-2007, 04:22 PM

I like Wes Clark a lot, but I don't think he can win. He (along with everyone else) will have trouble raising funds against Obama and Clinton. Edwards at least has the name recognition going for him at a level Clark doesn't have.I don't think that the idea of Clark as a "Conservative" Democrat is too much of an obstacle in the primary. He is new to the Democratic Party because he was an Army General and while that is a very political job, his personal politics were not supposed to be on display. If you look at the midterms, moderate democrats made the most gains. Look at Indiana, Ohio, PA, NC. I don't necessarily agree that because he is a former General and a new Dem that he is so conservative. For example, Iraq...he doesn't have an explicit plan but seems to emphasize diplomacy. Like most, I think he has realized that Iraq is unwinnable simply by military force.Dems1)Clinton 2) Obama 3) EdwardsRepublicans1)McCain 2) Whoever the GOP wants to put up to beat McCainGuliani has no chance. Too liberal, too many skeletons. Too Catholic.

Bulldogcakes

01-17-2007, 04:41 PM

fezticle98 wrote:Dems1)Clinton 2) Obama 3) EdwardsRepublicans1)McCain 2) Whoever the GOP wants to put up to beat McCainGuliani has no chance. Too liberal, too many skeletons. Too Catholic. I think Fezticle nailed it. I'd like to think that "anything can happen" but the process is so front-loaded that the candidates with the biggest war chests (re. McCain and Hillary) will be almost impossible to beat. The other candidates are either rasing name recognition (Obama/Hagel) and/or looking for VP or Cabinet appts (Obama/Guiliani/Mike Huckerbee).I think it'll be McCain vs Hillary, and the war will still be going on in Iraq, which I think will be an advantage for McCain. McCain isn't a perect candidate, no one is. But his negatives are NOWHERE NEAR Hillary's. So she will atttept to raise his to even things out, but it wont work. If McCain has anything, its a fairly good reputation.  McCain wins in 08. Dies in office and VP Guiliani takes over.

K.C.

01-17-2007, 06:28 PM

Bulldogcakes wrote: fezticle98 wrote: Dems1)Clinton 2) Obama 3) EdwardsRepublicans1)McCain 2) Whoever the GOP wants to put up to beat McCainGuliani has no chance. Too liberal, too many skeletons. Too Catholic. I think Fezticle nailed it. I'd like to think that "anything can happen" but the process is so front-loaded that the candidates with the biggest war chests (re. McCain and Hillary) will be almost impossible to beat. The other candidates are either rasing name recognition (Obama/Hagel) and/or looking for VP or Cabinet appts (Obama/Guiliani/Mike Huckerbee).I think it'll be McCain vs Hillary, and the war will still be going on in Iraq, which I think will be an advantage for McCain. McCain isn't a perect candidate, no one is. But his negatives are NOWHERE NEAR Hillary's. So she will atttept to raise his to even things out, but it wont work. If McCain has anything, its a fairly good reputation.  McCain wins in 08. Dies in office and VP Guiliani takes over.  I think McCain's in a tough spot. He's going to have to embrace the values/policies that Bush advocates to win the Republican primary. If he does that, Bush will be an albatross around McCain the entire general election. If he tries to go the maverick route, I think the Christian Conservatives turn on him.

TinyInfantJesus

01-17-2007, 10:52 PM

Obama has the advantage of being the first legit candidate to start swooning some of the swing states. It's being said that he will soon be making trips to Iowa and New Hampshire.I think it'd be great to see a Obama/Edwards vs. Guliani/McCain race. That's like 4 superpowers duking it out.

Fat_Sunny

01-18-2007, 12:00 AM

If The Republicans Want To Win In A Blowout, They Should Run A McCain-Rice Ticket.  Rice Is A Hero To Black Women (Despite Her Job And Politics).  Putting Her On The Ticket Would Shake-Up The Usual Equation.

Fat_Sunny

01-18-2007, 12:01 AM

This message was edited by Fat_Sunny on 1-18-07 @ 4:02 AM

AKA

01-18-2007, 05:01 AM

I think the Democratic ticket is just waiting for Hillary - right now Obama is everything to everyone in the party, because they don't know how he feels on each of the issues - he may end up being too liberal for some, or too moderate for others - Hillary's experience goes beyond just legislative, tho - she can take a punch and still stand (is there anything left that hasn't been said about her???), while we don't know if Obama can take the heat. Edwards, meanwhile, still has the stink of 2004 failure - as does Kerry. Biden and Vlsack are just not exciting enough, and Al Gore only runs IF Hillary doesn't run. McCain is in a HUGE pickle - again, trying to be everything to everyone might work if everyone doesn't already know you - at his level he is seen as a hypocrite ("FLIP! FLOP! FLIP! FLOP!") He pressed Bush to send in more troops - IF things in Iraq work out, then McCain will seem like an obvious choice, but if they don't he will get lumped in with the blame. Giuliani also has some Bush stank on him, and is too liberal for a GOP primary - although, I think he would make an excellent VP choice and would help whoever is the main candidate. Huckabee would be a really good choice - yes, he's a religious conservative, but he's also smart and actually seems to care about many of the issues that are deemed "liberal." The dude even pardoned Keith Richards! And, he has two big assets - he's Southern and he was a Governor. I'm personally rooting for a Clinton/Obama ticket vs Huckabee/Giuliani ticket.

A.J.

01-18-2007, 05:08 AM

AKA wrote: Giuliani also has some Bush stank on him, and is too liberal for a GOP primary - although, I think he would make an excellent VP choice and would help whoever is the main candidate.  Giuliani would be a better Attorney General.

K.C.

01-18-2007, 11:47 AM

TinyInfantJesus wrote: Obama has the advantage of being the first legit candidate to start swooning some of the swing states. It's being said that he will soon be making trips to Iowa and New Hampshire.I think it'd be great to see a Obama/Edwards vs. Guliani/McCain race. That's like 4 superpowers duking it out. I don't know that Obama is winning over a lot of people yet. He is dominating the media coverage, though, which is a plus, but he hasn't officially declared yet and he hasn't done a lot of campaigning. I think people are interested, but not necessarily in his camp yet. Edwards is the guy that's been been running all over the big primary states since the beginning of '06. I think people are sleeping on him because of the media love of Obama and Hillary. The one thing I will say, though, is the longer Hillary waits to declare, the tougher it will be for her. She's losing to Obama in terms of hype right now and she's losing to Edwards in terms of putting a good structure in place for the primaries. If she drags out whether or not she'll run through most of '07, she's going to have a ton of ground to make up. On a side note, if I'm Obama and I don't win the nomination, I wouldn't accept a VP nod. Two reasons:1) he can go back to the senate, build his profile, and come back as his own man in '12 or '16 (depending on whether the Dems win the White House) as opposed to being tied in with whoever wins the nomination in '08 (i.e. Hillary) for the rest of his career. 2) The Dems would be smart to pick someone like Evan Bayh from Indiana for a VP nod...someone with a lot of popularity from a state they don't traditionally win.   

This message was edited by K.C. on 1-18-07 @ 3:48 PM