The 2008 Elections! (da da da dummmm)

or Register to post new content in the forum

360 RepliesJump to last post

 

Comments

  • Allowed HTML tags: <em> <strong> <blockquote> <br> <p>

Plain text

  • No HTML tags allowed.
  • Web page addresses and e-mail addresses turn into links automatically.
  • Lines and paragraphs break automatically.
Mar 21, 2007 1:20 pm

Ok, so it's early. The media are still in the "let's try to whip up a frenzy" stage and most people could really care less at this point.


The exercise at this point is to pick your dark horses, your wild cards and give youself the ability to say I told ya so later.


For myself... Something that I said here or elsewhere back when he and Hillary went out on tour. Newt's the Republican to beat!


What's more he's going to be HARD to overcome (I'm a lifelong Dem and I think that I would vote for Newt!) At the same time, Newt is NOT a Ronald Reagan Republican! Not even! Forget what you think you know about Newt as a far right politician. Newt has learned under the foot of the master (Bill Clinton, who is by far the greatest Politician of our generation, regardless of what you think of him as a person or as a President) and has crafted programs for increased education spending, enhanced entitlements including a nationalized health care system, infrastructure spending in the galore range and other traditionally Democratic positions.


Newt is a brilliant politician, always has been even though he made some terrible blunders. He's strong in the south (not that this means as much as southerners would like us to think) and has international name recognition. The fact that he is not an "Attractive' candidate gives him a gravitas unavailable to someone "Pretty" like Barack Obama (who could be strong in the south if he leaves enough space on his bumper stickers that they can be easily converted into "Go Bama!" bumper stickers!)


Hillary's great liability is that controversy is attached to her like velcro. She's the opposite of Teflon. Even when there is no controversy, the media knows that it's the easiest shot to get aired. Still in all, she'll mop the floor with Obama.


Gore.... I do not know... He could be the Teddy Kennedy/ Mario Cuomo of this generation. Waiting waiting waiting...


His strong point is that he has the ability to bring the Ralph Nader sensibilities back into the Democratic party. Nader is absolutely right about an awful lot of things we don't want to face, but he's not an electable guy. Gore IS (if he had gotten the Green Votes in 2000 in Florida, he'd have won). 

Mar 21, 2007 2:21 pm

 Newt's the Republican to beat!



 


Hillary's great liability is that controversy is attached to her like velcro.


Her problem is she isn't likable. Newt has the same problem, thus the laughter after you claim that he's the guy to beat.



His strong point is that he has the ability to bring the Ralph Nader sensibilities back into the Democratic party.


IMHO, it's Nader "sensibilities" that are unelectable, not just Ralph himself.


Mar 21, 2007 2:32 pm

Nice analysis. Bill is bright, even if he thinks with his pecker, Hilary is not. Being conservative, how can I not like Obama who has to give up smoking to run for president.


Newt has the ability to transform himself, give him a lot of credit. Global warming makes a few social programs look like an inexpensive trip to Disneyland. Demographics will dictate some $$$.


Environmental and energy issues along with demographics will evolve into "the moral equivalent of war", maybe along with Jimmy's interest rates and sweater as uniform.


But human self interest will prevail (thankfully) and unprecedented wealth will continue to be created, even as we cook ourselves in overpopoluation.


So whether it's Newt, or Obama, or Al, pay your taxes now and put your money in a good federally tax exempt municipal bond fund and stocks and real estate. "Savers" will be punished by conservative and liberal, male and female  president alike.


Mar 21, 2007 2:49 pm

Well, that's what I put it up for. So that we could handicap the long shots.


Speaking of shots, apparently Ahnold and the Rushtur are at odds these days.

Mar 21, 2007 3:05 pm

...handicap the long shots.


Gore wins, seven to one odds ( at virtually no risk ). There is another freak hurricane at a critical time, and the masses sweep him into power to "fix" our climate problem.

Mar 21, 2007 3:08 pm

That's actually pretty good... Regression to the mean would indicate a medium heavy Hurricane season this year... (unless you toss Tornados into the mix, which then means we've been about even 05 and 06)

Mar 21, 2007 3:38 pm

Tornados get to count, according to Big A.


Whoa, I like the regression to the mean idea.


Hillary: 4 to 1. She starts taking a prescription that makes her feel genuine, and it is regulated in the right dose.


Newt: 3 to 1. Already been through the learning curve, will he be derailed by the conservative intelligence curve.


Colin: 5 to 1. Wife says what the heck, run, and Obama slips but American likes the idea.


O'Reilly: 2:1. Folks decide his Masters Degree is as good as any credentials and his current anger management campaign is successful.


1:1 The anchor on liberal cable that talks baby talk: propelled by the litigous lawyer from Carolina's good looks ( who fell into a pile of hog dung), he sweeps a kinder, gentler dumbed down America.

Mar 21, 2007 6:26 pm

Fred Thompson

Mar 21, 2007 6:35 pm

Yeah, I heard about that...


Without Newt, I'd give him a pretty good chance (but I'd not vote for him.) But he's essentially just "more of the same". that's s far as I know, if you can tell me different, I'm listening.


What Newt has that NO OTHER candidate (aside from maybe Nader) is a solid established platform. The fact that it goes against the twisted platform of the neoconnotic Republican party (the one that got hammered, by Democrats, of all people, in the last election and need to do something different if they're going to) makes it stand out and get recognised.


Mar 21, 2007 6:48 pm

Newt is not going to appeal to the middle of the road , blue dog  Democrats and will galvanize the wild eyed lefties and the MSM who are their lap dogs poodles. They hate his guts to the ground.  Newt will most certainly not appeal to the right of center Repubs and has a lot of ugly personal baggage to carry around not to mention the interminable dredging up of every claim logged against him when he was Speaker of the House. 


I personally like Newt and his platform very much.  I think he raises the IQ points of the room by just being there but I have no hope that he can win the race.


In order for the Republicans to win, they have to have someone who can appeal to the right of center Repubs and I don't think that either Rudy or Newt will be able to do this as well as the mainstream of the party.  The mid center and slightly to the right of center, Dems and especially the Independent voters who I think are mostly moderates and pragmatists would (IMHO) be swayed by a Fred Thompson. To my mind he comes across in a very much Reaganesque manner both in personal delivery and in philosophy. 



Mar 21, 2007 6:54 pm

What about Jim Cramer? Wouldn't he be shoe-in when America learns that

he's so adept at manipulating the markets.

Mar 21, 2007 8:57 pm

That idea may not be far Kvetched, since America seems to be warming to ads for day trading seminars once again. Does he get away with making us feel bad for not being as successful, and then just get to be another shmuck.


Loonie's point about Newt being able to hunt point left of the right Right makes sense, though. How about a nice cabinet post as reward for pulling it together.  Any one better known than Thompson, though?

Mar 21, 2007 10:03 pm

You know, I even watch C-span occasionally...but who the hell is Fred Thompson?

Mar 21, 2007 10:53 pm

Have you ever watched Law and Order, The Hunt for Red October. He's a former US Senator from Tenn.

Mar 21, 2007 10:55 pm

The last actor-turned-POTUS did pretty well.

Mar 22, 2007 10:43 am

Fred Thompson is a conservative Senator for Tennessee.  What I like about him is that he doesn't seem to waiver back and forth on issues to appear popular with each crowd he is speaking to.   He is true to his principles without being dogmatic about them.


I think he has a good chance of pulling in the swing voters who are not knee jerk Democrat or Republican voters.  The uncommitted swing voters will be the ones to carry the election.


http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/FredDalton_Thompson


http://masonconservative.typepad.com/themason_conservative/ 2007/03/fred_thompson_f.html

Mar 22, 2007 11:22 am

What I like about him is that he doesn't seem to waiver back and forth on issues


Except for that, 'I'm an actor, I'm a politician, I'm an actor, I'm a politician' thing (I think that'll weigh him down considerably, people will be like, "what, is the presidency the best you could do? Couldn't get the Ameritrade gig 'cause Waterson won't give it up?")


I'm not a fan of Thompson's I think that he's perceived as a hard line right winger to northern middle roaders. Rightly or wrongly.


I'm not saying he wouldn't be a good candidate, but I don't think that he has built the sort of internal political base that many other candidates have. Newt has people in all 50 states who will work HARD for his organization.


This is also why Hillary is going to crush Barak, she has the infrastructure and she has a lot of  "Peckers in her pocket" (as LBJ used to refer to it as when someone owed him his political existence). She built it during her Senate Campaign in NY (the first one being against relatively gigantic odds, and she won by winning in traditionally Republican areas of the State).


At this point in the political process, what the "people" want is irrelavent, the candidates will be chosen by the powers that be in the respective parties.


This means that Hillary will be attacked from all sides as others try to show that she can't win.


Unfortunately, for the Republicans, they really have nobody. Rudy? Fuggedaboudit! (aside from the longstanding curse on NYC mayors, not one in modern history has gone on to ANY higher elected position no Govs, no Senators, no Presidents) He's sort of the worst of both parties. Yeah he's pro choice but he's pro Il Duce too (he ran NYC like a tyrant) so both sides find lots not to like about him (and don't get me started on the botch job of 9/11 he made).

Mar 22, 2007 11:27 am

nope...this country isn't ready for a woman president and the former President wouldn't look good in a dress or make a very good first lady either.  You'd know she was wearing an earphone and he was telling her what to do all day....talk about electing a President for a third term.  Most male egos can't handle a woman running and that's why they say she is a lesbian.

Mar 22, 2007 12:03 pm

Newt has people in all 50 states who will work HARD for his organization


So did Nader and Perot... so what.

Mar 22, 2007 12:31 pm

I'm not saying she'd win the election, but right now her poll nums are actually going up and she has a 37 to 22% lead over Obama (who's the num2) and it's not like the campaigning has begun.


The presidential election is the democrats to lose at this point. The Rupubs will need to come up with a real good reason for people to give them another chance.