Reply With Quote
I concur, but sadly we're stuck with this bunch
Democratics: Clinton/Richardson
Republicans: Guiliani/Huckabee
President: Guiliani
i think there's no way obama will pick hitlary, and vice versa, to be their VP. i just don't see that happening. if obama wins today i say he's the nominee.
D: obama/?
R: Thompson/ with either Hunter/Santorum/McCain in that order
Pres: Thompson/?
I concur, but sadly we're stuck with this bunch
Democratics: Clinton/Richardson
Republicans: Guiliani/Huckabee
President: Guiliani
D: Obama/Dodd
R: McCain/Ridge
Next president: Obama
The Democratic race depends largely on what John Edwards does, does he stay in till the end like he says he will, or does he drop out and team up with Obama or Clinton? I see zero chance of Gore running with Clinton...Gore wouldn't lower himself....as I've hinted before, I think Hillary's front-running mate (for now) is Former Iowa Governor, Tom Vilsack...unless worse comes to worse and she is forced to dance with team Edwards, but for now, she clearly has a step on Obama....
On the Republican side, I can't see McCain winning this race...fact is, I can't see Romney winning either...you'd be a fool to count the 9iu11iani campaign dead, it ain't dead yet despite his poor showing so far in Iowa, Michigan, and well, everywhere that ain't Florida....a scary (on so many levels) combination would be McCain/9iu11iani or vise versa...stay tuned......
For some time, I was wondering is any of the three leading democrats opt out, who will get most of the supporters?
I have a hard time on an educated guess there. My gut tell me that Edwards will drop first of the three, and Obama will get most his supporters.
Other thoughts?
In the case of the republicans, Romney is the only choice from one voting conservative. The wins in other states were because the primary vote wasn't limited to republicans. Now that Romney wins the latest race.. and with a reasonable margin, I change my assessment to Romney being the republican nominee.
General public. I don't care about the religion of a candidate. However, in this day and time, I don't see a Mormon being elected President.
Liberals would have no problem voting for a Mormon if they agreed with their views. Romney was elected govenor in one of the most liberal states in the country after all. Romney's challenge is since he is a Republican and the Evangelicals are so prominent within the Republican base, he has a hard time getting their support. Half of them may support him but there is a significant enough percentage that it makes his challenge bigger than it would be if he were a non-religious candidate. By non-religious I mean he claims something like Lutheran but he does not attend church regularly.
A lot of the Evangelicals look at LDS as a cult.
Surprising the amount of ST posters that are holding out hope for Drop Dead Fred Thompson.
He ran 3rd in Iowa despite running a lacksadasical campaign and committing almost no money on the ground. Sure he had poor showings in Michigan and NH, but those are not states he expected to do well in.
I honestly don't think he has a realistic shot and would prefer if McCain knocked him out of the compe ion in SC, but just imagine how he might have fared if he actually WANTED to compete in this electoral process....
He's probably the closest thing to a traditional Republican candidate in this race and I think that's something people are looking for.
Instead, they have to swallow the flimsy rhetoric that's spewing out of Romney's mouth about being a true conservative....what a load of crap.
I disagree with the posters who think Edwards' supporters would flock to Obama once the Breck Girl drops out. I think they will go to Clinton. Edwards' core of support is with the unions and other lower-middle-class workers, and Clinton is doing better with those voters than Obama is.
I can't help but think that if Obama were the candidate to drop out, that Edwards be the one who benefits more than Clinton......so there has to be some sur-jection there....
Can't you people just make a prediction and leave it alone? Can we lock the thread now?
in before the lock
, I wanted to wait until after the Nevada caucus to make my prediction, but I guess now is as good a time as any -
D - Obama/Biden
R - McCain/Lieberman (GOP goes ape )
W - Obama/Biden
Democratic Nominee: Barack Obama
Republican Nominee: John McCain
Democratic Ticket: Obama/Edwards
Republican Ticket: McCain/Thompson
President: Barack Obama
What are you mad because for once there's no copy and paste partisan arguing going on but rather a completely civil discussion on how people are viewing the election process?
You would get upset over what I thought was one of the better threads in here content wise.
Dem Ticket - Clinton/Richardson
I can't see Obama coming together with Clinton. The campaign got ugly, got ok and just got ugly again. I don't think there's any stepping back from this now. I think what you're going to see over the next couple of weeks is a really really ugly mess of things on the Dems side. And well, baby boomers just aren't ready to trust a black man yet.
Republican ticket
McCain/Hannity.
Seriously.
Ok just kiding
McCain and I have no idea who else but someone a of a lot more conservative than anyone running on the republican side right now. Someone to really appeal to middle America.
And McCain wins in a landslide because even though Hilary is better than a black man, she's still just a woman and no way she's beating a good ole white man.
Democratic Nominee: Hillary Clinton
Republican Nominee: Mitt Romney
Democratic Ticket: Clinton/Richardson
Republican Ticket: Romney/Pawlenty or Sanford
President: Mitt Romney
Clinton's candidacy would actually make Republicans care about this election. That it would take the great to motivate the GOP base says a lot about the current GOP field as well as the 8 years of W's reign. Even with much that has been made about Romney's faith, social conservatives can rationalize away the notion that Jesus post-resurrection smoked the peace pipe with some Native Americans or whatever when the Great Sataness is on the ballot.
Romney has been running a rather competent campaign and he doesn't have to worry about funds running low, unlike the rest of the GOP field. Looking at the GOP candidates, Romney is the one who is ultimately the least objectionable to the 3 major factions of the base (economic conservatives, hawks, and social conservatives). Huckabee would be an umitigated disaster for the GOP. McCain is still too disliked among the base. Giuliani has too much baggage and social conservatives would have a hard time embracing him.
For the general election, Clinton picks Bill Richardson as her running mate with a view towards mobilizing hispanic voters. Romney goes with Gov. Pawlenty of Minnesota or perhaps a southern governor like Sanford of South Carolina in keeping with his 'Washington outsider' campaign meme.
Between Hillary on the ballot causing the GOP to show up and Romney's political abilities, the ones that enabled him to win the Massachusetts governorship, Romney wins.
In the end, none of this matters. The country is still ed.
Last edited by Holt's Cat; 01-22-2008 at 01:52 AM.
I will say that it's a shame that the Clinton machine will ultimately squeeze the life out of Obama's candidacy. Out of the major contenders in either party he's the only one who doesn't automatically offend when he opens his mouth. He's also the one who seems to realize that we are in the 21st century.
Considering that no matter who is elected approximately 95% of federal policy is set in stone and that we just saw an allegedly "conservative" Republican administration push through the greatest expansion of the federal government in quite some time, having to listen to a President Obama for the next 4 years would at least be aesthetically pleasing, much better than the flat Midwestern pandering tone of his arch nemesis.
Well, I was wrong.
Fred Thompson drops out...
It's okay, just pick another one.
And you don't even have to explain yourself....
Thanks.It's okay, just pick another one.
And you don't even have to explain yourself....
It's okay, just pick another one.
And you don't even have to explain yourself....
Yeah, didn't mean that to come across as sarcastic.
Just meant that it was your thread and you stipulated originally that no explanation was necessary.
So if you go for John Edwards, we understand....(that was sarcasm)
I'm pulling for Alfred E. Neumann now...
There are currently 1 users browsing this thread. (0 members and 1 guests)
Posting Permissions
