Caveat: All predictions are subject to flip-floppery.
Hillary Clinton gets endorsed by Maryland Gov. Martin O’Malley
As the race stands now, considering we’ve got about 7 months until Iowa/New Hampshire, I would say Sen. Clinton wins the Democratic nomination. Obama seems to have hit a wall and there are still serious questions about whether he and his campaign have enough “fire in the belly” to win the nomination and the general election. I’m also skeptical of the Edwards’ campaign organization (the agonizingly slow and inept response to the blogger “controversy” was troubling) as well as whether labor support is enough to push him over the top. There’s still time for both of them (and maybe Richardson) but we’re seriously in “show me the money” phase right now.
Sen. Clinton has clear negatives - she is polarizing and her vote on the war stinks (as well as the refusal to really apologize for the vote) but her organization is second to none, although I and others find the mantra from her pollster Mark Penn of “inevitability” to be both ridiculous and crass. Frankly you get the sense from Penn that we shouldn’t even bother with the primaries.
Aside from the war - and don’t let some folks confuse you, it is going to be the issue of the election - I more or less line up with Sen. Clinton on the vast majority of issues (which of course means I’m a corporatist DLC sellout or whatever, more on that in the future). There’s one school of thought saying that she wouldn’t end the war if she got in, but her statement on the issue is pretty unambiguous. If she moved away from it, she’d be cut off at the knees from left and right from the get-go.
I think McCain wins the Republican nomination - they’ll stick with what they know versus a field of people whose conservative credentials are shaky at best.
And Hillary would beat McCain, helped largely by independents who are now turned off by McCain’s propagandistic war cheerleading.
Also, increased - slightly - Democratic majorities in the House and Senate.
Or I could - likely - be amazingly wrong and await my deportation to Jamaica (”I don’t care if you were born in America and your parents were both legal immigrants, they have accents and that’s reason enough”) by President Tancredo. And that would truly strike fear into my heart.
I agree with you that Sen Clinton would beat Sen McCain, which is why he won’t get the nomination.
Republicans are basically divided into three groups when it comes to Sen Clinton
1) People that fear her
2) People that hate her
3) People that fear and hate her.
If you are not in one of those groups, you are not a Republican.
Oliver, rest assured that Republicans are behaving much smarter about primary politics than Democrats.
Clinton has strong support among more than 50% of Democrats but has a surprising and significant negative rating among everybody else. Whereas we could have a very successful candidate in either Edwards (not my choice) or Obama (my choice), we will go with the candidate who will actually make this a race rather than a run-away.
On the Republican side, I speculate that Mitt Romney will be the likely nominee, because although he has some odd flip-flops, Republicans realize that their other candidates are simply unelectible in head-to-head competition.
Clinton beats Romney probably, but like I said, it’s close.
I’m also skeptical of the Edwards’ campaign organization (the agonizingly slow and inept response to the blogger “controversy” was troubling
You’re kidding right? A small potatoes controversy, that most people have forgotten already is leaving you skeptical?
Leave it to O’Malley to run ahead of the parade which is about to turn off the main street.
That’s kind of my point - it was a small potatoes nothing controversy, so why were they so inept at responding to it? If they continue to have so much trouble with things like that, sorry to say, they’ll be mincemeat when the RNC gets the ball rolling next year.
As far as O’Malley, you are aware that he was just elected governor and signed a living wage bill into law, no? It’s fine to disagree with his endorsement of Sen. Clinton, but pretty silly to argue whether the guy has adept political senses.
The last time you were so high on a Maryland bill, how’d that turn out?
I’m fine with that, unlike conservatives I trust the vast majority of judges to interpret the law. I don’t believe in shooting them.
Nor do I, or 99.99999% of Conservatives either.
Painting with quite a broad brush there, aren’t you? I guess this means that us Righties can use those San Fran nutjobs to tar & feather all liberals as solider-hating traiters. Good to know. Thanks!
I copped to using excessive hyperbole the other day. I hope you have the honesty & decency to do the same.
I guess this means that us Righties can use those San Fran nutjobs to tar & feather all liberals as solider-hating traiters
Are you asserting that they don’t?
Hyperbole, sure. But I honestly believe the rhetoric from way too many conservative politicians and leaders creates an atmosphere of violence around judges.
“Clinton beats Romney probably, but like I said, it’s close.”
Huh? If Romney is the Republican candidate, they might as well give his concession speech during the RNC.
A large percentage of the Christian right, the Republican’s base, think Mormonism is a strange cult. That’ll be enough turn them off.
GOP’s running out of time.
My money’s on Thompson as a (maybe the only) compromise candidate that will maintain GOP unity for another cycle.
Giuliani and Romney and McCain divide the Party, Thompson they can at least grit their teeth and hope for the best.
Have to say that right now I see Clinton-Thompson a toss-up in the swing states, where once again grass-roots, boots-on-the-ground, get-out-the-base prevails.
Dems have THREE major swing-state factors in their favor this cycle:
1. Howard Dean’s vision, strength, and leadership.
2. For the first time in decades, a MONEY ADVANTAGE (???!!!???)
3. Bush to hang around the GOP’s neck like a stinking albatross. It’s not just Iraq, it’s Bush-led incompetence, corruption, arrogance, and denial of reality.
No matter who we Dems select as our candidate, these three factors will be HUGE.
I see real, permanent, and unprecedented gains across the board for Dems, and especially for Progressive Liberals, who had almost been hounded out of existence by the GOP’s machine but who have come back with a vengeance.
I don’t want to address anybody personally, so I will say this: The so - called “Christian Right” is not a gang of Fundamentalist Protestants who took over the Republican Party in the 1980’s.
Having been “Present at the Creation”, so to speak (I was 18 in 1964), I know that fundamentalists were about as divided up politically as any other religion.
It was when the “full court press” was put on to drive God from the Public Square (ending school prayer, public Nativity scenes, allowing nationwide abortion, which scrapped something like 38 states’ laws), that certain Protestants, Catholics and Jews joined forces to fight back. Note that this was not in response to the anti - war movement, or in response to limousine liberals.
And the point is? That rather than give any more ground to the ACLU (which seems to relish fighting for the rights of people to exorcise Catholicism from their midst, more than anything else), they will vote for a Republican — maybe even Rudy Giuliani.
Except that the ACLU has fought for the rights of the religious time and time again no matter the popularity because they have something called principles.
Furthermore, Jews vote Dem as do Catholics with the exception of ‘04 in a trend I think is an outlier, but we’ll see.
And if the Christian right doesn’t run the party why do the candidates have to pay tribute to Don Falwell and Don Dobson? Why is Giuliani’s campaign in trouble for donating to Planned Parenthood?
You can pull the “I’m older than you” card all you want, but history is history. Just because I was alive during the Challenger disaster does not make me a space shuttle expert.
My two cents, as of right now:
Hillary wins the Democratic nomination as she still has the strongest machine, despite her negatives. Obama is too new and inexperienced and Edwards, is he still running? Gore could give Hillary a run but if he doesn’t get in now (same for Thompson) forget it — the days of a divided convention and a last minute savior are far over.
As of now, I still think Giuliani gets the Republican nomination as ultimately, he can beat Hillary — McCain cannot. Reoublicans (and Democrats for that matter) have to look to who can win, not who would they like to see run. Giuliani give the Republicans the best chance to keep the White House.
I am increasingly impressed by Romney, however, and do not rule out a serious challenge by Thompson (if he gets in now). If Romney gets the nonimation I don’t see him beating Hillary as of today, but at the time of the nomination, perhaps.
Ultimately, my prediction is (subject to change) President Giuliani.
And the point is?
Its caled the American Civil Liberties Union for a reason. Not the Some American Civil Liberties Are Better Than Others Union.
Civil Liberties are treasonous leftist propaganda and America doesn’t need them.
“I don’t care if you were born in America and your parents were both legal immigrants, they have accents and that’s reason enough”) by President Tancredo
Tancredo is against ILLEGAL immigration.What part don”t you understand. If someone has an accent, then they are at least speaking the common language. Do you think people from Jamaica need to learn Spanish?
Duros62: I sense you are trying to make some devilishly clever point.
Perhaps you’d like to share it with us?
Oliver: “the ACLU has fought for the rights of the religious time and time again”
Not nearly as many times as they have fought religion. I never doubted they had principles — they are anti - religious in principle.
The number of Jews and Catholics voting Democratic is, in general, decreasing. But more importantly, there are a large number of pro - life Catholics and Jews who know exactly what Democrats stand for, and won’t vote for them. I’m one of them.
“And if the Christian right doesn’t run the party why do the candidates… ”
Why do Democrats address union conventions, and the NAACP? You have to press the flesh. You just choose to identify the influence the Fundamentalists have over the Republicans as somehow different from the influence of groups like the NEA, or AARP or the NAACP.
“Just because I was alive during the Challenger disaster does not make me a space shuttle expert.”
Correct. And if I was watching television live when it blew up, you’re not going to tell me it didn’t happen.
The Left’s candidates could all be clones of the boring past, really.
But those on the Right? WOWIEE!
What an extremist opportunistic hack-a-palooza-la!
So based on what I know about the Right, I came up with some ideal alternate candidates.
Other citizens of this great country more representative of the Republican party and their current constituents issues and values:
Larry the Cable Guy
Charles Manson
PeeWee Herman
(I bet Rove is already in secret talks with Manson!)
The modern GOP was welded together in the fire of the Goldwater meltdown in ‘64.
At that time, and during Nixon’s successful presidential runs after, we saw the birth of the modern GOP coalition.
Karl Rove in Texas in the 70’s and 80’s, a heavy Dem state, realized all he needed to win was to weld 50% plus one.
The modern GOP’s 50% plus one was Fundies, Conservatives, right-wingers, moral majority working class, and the white South.
Clinton gave the GOP the moral advantage that swung just enough moderate undecided over to get them their chance which they capitalized in Florida.
Once Rove began to “Architect” from the West Wing with Santorum and DeLay, they went after money with a vengeance, and built the K-Street model and a “New Media”-driven pro-corporatist empire, spearheaded by Rush and Hannity and FOX.
The GOP’s corporatist, power-at-all-costs ideas do not sell well in the heartland they need so badly; in fact they needed every penny of Bush’s huge war chest to win in 2004, and it came down to GOP operatives in Ohio to squeak out a win after
911 gave them the fear factor that swung security moms and moderates willing to have Bush finish out his term.
Now, it appears that coalition has fallen apart. The Dems have struck back in the media wars and fought the “New Media” to a draw. (Thanks, Ollie and MediaMatters!)
The old hot-button issues “God in the Public Square! Abortion on Demand! Damn Socialist Tax-and Spenders! just do not work any more the way they once did.
Why? The GOP blew it. Conservatives and Libertarians woke up to the fact they’ve been had: Deficit at an all-time high, nation-building, HUGE government, Roe v Wade is stil the law of the land, and they can’t even begin to consider the fact that the Bushies have gone after the Constitution with a shredder in their zeal to control social policy and remain in power.
AS Zell Miller used to say, and as I hear Conservatives say now, “I never left my Party, my Party left me”.
We will begin to see many once-solid GOP and Conservative voters decide they’ve had enough, and begin to look for alternatives.
That’s why I feel Thompson is their only choice: He can buy them time to sort out the coming disaster as the GOP coalition fractures and topples like glaciers tumbling into the sea, leaving its various factions stranded on their ice floes like drowning polar bears.
Giulani or Romney as a candidate means the Christian Right and Fundies will not vote GOP. McCain as a candidate means the Right-wingers and moderates won’t vote GOP.
Thompson is their only hope to stay united and give it one last try.
Thompson is incredibly target-rich in a General Election, as we all know. But I make the argument he is really all they have.
No devilishly clever point, Frank. Just that the ACLU defends the liberties of groups they may not share opinions of just as readily as they defend the liberties of those they do. You choose to see them as anti-religious, but I don’t think that’s so. They have this crazy idea that religion should not be included in government or government-sponsored things.
AND JUST HOW IS THAT NOT ANTI-RELIGIOUS??????? BLUUAHGHL
The ACLU, of which I’d be a member were I American, has in the past defended the Westbro Baptist Church’s right to…well you know what those fuckers do.
“Freedom of speech applies to absolutely everyone and everything, no exceptions.” James Madison (in Duckman). The ACLU encourage the gritting of teeth for the good of society. Not that Frank or his friends are interested in the “good of society”.
Allow me to indulge in a little wild speculation, please.
Clinton wins the Dem nomination and wins it early because so many states have advanced their primaries. McCain wins the GOP nomination, likewise very early.
Now we’ve got two candidates with high negatives and eight months for the media to pick them both apart. We have also arrived at a time when the electorate is sharply divided from 15 years of the major parties using wedge issues to sharply define themselves.
Sounds like a super-prime opportunity for someone to capitalize on the electorate’s frustrations with the available choices. Yes, I’m talking about an independent or third party candidate.
OK, the track record of candidates from outside the two mainstream parties hasn’t been stellar–even when the candidates are solid and serious. John Anderson back in 1980 made a good showing, but didn’t win a single state. Ross Perot might have taken a few states if he hadn’t withdrawn and started floating tales about secret plots.
Nevertheless, the divide is deep and the candidates have high negative ratings.
An independent candidate could radically change the face of American politics. If a popular independent could carry 15 or 20 members of the House and 3 or 4 Senators in on his (or her) coattails, you won’t even recognize the current major parties five years hence.
The non-allied members of congress, backed by the Executive, would become the focus of legislative bargaining unlike anything we’ve seen. With a third player involved, political maneuvering in Washington would shift from a contest of strength to building coalitions and consensus.
This would also have a liberating effect on the current major parties. Mainstream republicans would no longer be beholden to Christian conservatives. Economic conservatives in both parties could ally to craft tax policy. Progressive Dems would no longer be able to buy a place at the legislative bargaining table by moderating their views–moderates will turn to the non-allied to build coalitions.
OK, so it’s all far-fetched. Sounds like fun, though.
I kind of have the feeling that there a a couple of posters here that don’t read very broadly.
Fd10801:
You may be sincere in your beliefs but you are sincerely misinformed and manipulated by people who have peverted Christian theology for a political purpose. The documentation of this has been growing. The takeover of the Southern Baptist Convention in 1979 is one of the best documented.
Read this site for a month and open your mind.
http://www.talk2action.org/
On Republican nominees:
They stink. And they all have issues. Much larger issues than any democratic nominee. Giuliani is pro choice and vocal about it. How does that work for the pro coathanger party? He also has demonstrated poor judgement and would get hammered in the general election campaign. Romney is a Mormon and this is an issue for GOP voters. He also comes across as slick and shallow in person and he’s from the North East not the repubs favorite. McCain has tied the War around his neck and is polling as a loser in the gerneral against any generic dem nominee.
Huckabee had promise but came out against evolution which annoys the libertarian business faction. Brownback is too thoecratic. Tucrinado is too angry. And the law and order guy who hasn’t entered yet is apparently really lazy and doesn’t give good speeches. It’s a disaster for the GOP and a lot of their insiders like Novak are saying as much.
One final note is that with the growing number of State Legislatures and governorships under dem control and the busting open of the Ganzales DOJ attorney purge scandal, we can say that the Republican voter suppression machine will not be working as efficiently in 2008 as it did in 2004 and 2000. By itself that could make enough of a difference to put any generic dem candidate over a generic repub candidate.
I even read a thing today about Universales, the latin American tv network, blanqueting their airwaves with pro voter registration drives. This could throw the whole southwest to the Democrats in 2008
Northern Observer: Listen, there is no magic formula that goes, “As soon as you know what I know, you will believe what I believe”. Did I say that to you about my beliefs? Did I suggest you read First Things { http://www.firstthings.com/ } and open your mind?
It couldn’t possibly have occurred to you that you “are sincerely misinformed and manipulated by people who have perverted Christian theology for a political purpose”, right?
Oh, no! I’ve been mesmerized, hypnotized and indoctrinated. Only YOU know the truth!
I think the Hispanic television network you’re referring to is called Univision. Have you ever watched it?
Anyone who even refers to a “Republican voter suppression machine” gets to wear the tin foil beanie…
“Anyone who even refers to a “Republican voter suppression machine” gets to wear the tin foil beanie…”
You realize part of the “Republican voter suppression machine” was recently sent to jail. Or was the judge in that case part of the Tinfoil Brigade?
Well, I’m sure curious. Which part of the “Republican voter suppression machine” was sent to jail, and why?
I guess it was the “Invisible Republican”
“I guess it was the “Invisible Republican”"
Jesus Christ, Frank. What the fuck is your problem? I don’t respond to your post in 45 minutes so you have to.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2002_New_Hampshire_Senate_election_phone_jamming_scandal
CSS: It was your idea to be cryptic. If you knew who the person was, you should have named him. Which you still haven’t done.
Why?
Because it was a State election going back 5 years, and the 2006 Washington Post story that tried to implicate the White House (printed on page 10) came a cropper.
In other words, you already knew it was a nothing story, and nothing like evidence of a “Republican voter suppression machine”
BTW, “Jesus Christ, Frank. What the fuck is your problem?” is a bit out of character for “the greatest man I’ll never know”, eh?
“It was your idea to be cryptic. If you knew who the person was, you should have named him. Which you still haven’t done”
This is a complete non-sequitor and a lie.
You asked for a name, you waited 45 minutes and complained I hadn’t provided on yet.
(And if you had followed my link, you would know I have since given more than enough evidence.)
Federal case where the conficted had ties to the White House. Yeah, it’s a nothing story.
You’re a fucking loser, Frank.
Excuse me, but I said you hadn’t named him, because you had not. The Washington Post story indicated that the “ties” were meaningless.
The story referred to a New Hampshire State Senate race, not even the Presidential Election at the state level.
Not exactly the stuff of which “Republican voter suppression machine[s]” are made.
And that piece of shit response took 19 hours!
Why don’t you head back to The Only Web Space That Matters?
“The story referred to a New Hampshire State Senate race, not even the Presidential Election at the state level.”
So the New Hampshire Republican party is a totally different plitical entity from the national Republican party.
Wow. Only you would be stupid enough to believe that.
By the way, asshole, the story I linked to gave names. It even gave what crimes there were convicted of and how long they were sentenced to.
But I guess that’s not enough for someone as stupid as you. I guess I have to cut and paste names in this actually thread to satisfy the likes of you.
“Why don’t you head back to The Only Web Space That Matters?”
Hey Frank, post you last name so I can dig into your internet dealings, or shut the fuck up.
Fucking coward.
The cursing and swearing are not good signs, CSS. Remember your warning to me. People have had nervous breakdowns on the Internet in flame wars, you said.
I’m in Graduate school now, studying to be a therapist. In about a year, I’ll be able to help you if when you snap.
Sorry about that “name thing”.
“The devil is in the details”. It’s an American saying — you may not know it.
And you can click on my name and get to my blog. It’s certainly not as sickeningly pretentious as yours.
But, then, whose is?
Whose could be?