President Bush in the White House

[GENIERE]

I think Dean will lose in the Iowa Caucus as well as the NH primary. This egocentric person will then announce that he will run for president under the auspices of the Reform Party and ask his supporters to follow. Democrats will have a choice of voting for Clark, Dean, or Nader. Republicans will have 240 seats in the House and 57 seats in the Senate after the 2004 election as well President Bush in the White House.

 

[russ_watters]

I'm not sure about Dean losing those primaries or splitting off, but I agree that the general theme of infighting will continue and be partially responsible for an outcome similar to what you predict.

I have said before the Democratic Party is going to come apart, but I'm not sure we're there yet.

 

[selfAdjoint]

I don't think Dean will have a clear win in Iowa, because of the way those selections are made. Gephardt, who is second behind Dean there, expects to pick up the votes for candidates who won't make the minimum to get on the ballot. I think Mosely-Braun's withdrawal yesterday was a ploy to deny her Iowa supporters to Gephardt. ut I don't think that's going to be good enough. Dean will come out on top, but the "news" will be how strong Gephardt ran.

I think Dean will recover in NH, beating Clark handily there, but he will DIE in South Carolina, and it will be obvious that he can't take any southern states, but Clark can. So what happens then? Clark-Gephardt ticket anybody?

 

[Njorl]

The only southern state in play is Florida, maybe Clark could win Arkansas. Bush can already count the electoral votes of the others. Picking a candidate on their capacity to run in the south is pointless.

These are the states that will be contended most sharply:

Florida, Ohio, West Virginia (Went for Bush last time)

Illinois, Iowa, Michigan, New Jersey, Pennsylvania, Washington, Wisconsin (went for Gore last time)

Of these, only Iowa has an early primary. The Iowa caucus system is so bizarre it is not a good indicator of how a candidate would do in a general election.

It is really an awful system for the Democrats this time around. They are likely to have their candidate decided by primaries in states that are not up for grabs in the general election, most of which will go Republican. It isn't until the 11th and 12th primaries (Michigan and Washington) that there will be elections that will give the slightest clue as to who will do well in November.

My prediction, Dean will do well in both upcoming races, probably first in each, maybe 2nd in each. Even if he completely flops though, he will continue to campaign strongly as a Democrat. He has money, and he knows these 2 races mean nothing. All they are is an opportunity to land a knock-out blow against a poorly funded candidate.

Njorl

 

[GENIERE]

It looks increasingly bad for Dean who has shot himself in the foot, not once but too many times to remain viable. I suspect Kerry will win in Iowa and NH. Clark will, I think, win the ensuing primaries. The Zogby Iowa polls as of today show a strong margin for Kerry, and of course Clark is not in the caucus, explaining his 3% tally. Zogby, the person, is to my knowledge left of center politically, but his organization seems unbiased, and has been remarkably accurate in past presidential elections and primaries.

Kerry 24
Dean 19
Gephardt 19
Edwards 17
Clark 3
Kucinich 3
Lieberman 1
Sharpton .1
Undecided 13

To me, Kerry seems to resemble a pull string doll that emits sounds, even the f word, spouting that which he thinks audiences want to hear. As Gore found, it is not possible to win by representing to be something you’re not. The argument of getting the most votes is not valid, as Gore should have easily won by a large percentage given the positive perception of the Clinton administration.

Clark, although I could never vote for him, would be the least negative candidate in my eyes. I may be correct in thinking that some republicans and independent voters could more easily be swayed to vote for Clark than any other democratic candidate. Clark will definitely have to show his true colors to succeed against President Bush. All of his statements about the Iraqi war before becoming a candidate were pro war. If he runs on his principles, he has a chance. Catering to each of the leftist single-issue voters, will only lead to defeat. Most American voters like a centrist position. The political center has moved to the right in recent years. Clinton got it. Gore didn’t. I can’t recall the source, but it was stated that 23% of Americans perceive themselves as liberals, while 34% perceive themselves as conservatives. A Harvard multi-university poll showed an amazing rise in the number of students who consider themselves conservatives.

A recent author (? White) and others believe this coming election will not be decided by the usual economic considerations, nor even security and the Iraqi situation. The premise is that voters will deem “values” the most important issue. The author contends this will divide the country in a way not seen since the Civil War.

At this time, it is difficult to present a winning scenario for the democrats. The most disastrous situation will occur if Nader decides to run, as he will get his typical 2-3% of votes from states democrats need most, especially California.

 

[Njorl]

A recent author (? White) and others believe this coming election will not be decided by the usual economic considerations, nor even security and the Iraqi situation. The premise is that voters will deem “values” the most important issue. The author contends this will divide the country in a way not seen since the Civil War.

I can understand why you forgot his name. He obviously doesn't know what he's writing about.

 

[LURCH]

Originally posted by GENIERE
I think Dean will lose in the Iowa Caucus as well as the NH primary. This egocentric person will then announce that he will run for president under the auspices of the Reform Party and ask his supporters to follow. Democrats will have a choice of voting for Clark, Dean, or Nader. Republicans will have 240 seats in the House and 57 seats in the Senate after the 2004 election as well President Bush in the White House.

Well, you're right on target so far. Kerry won Iowa and Dean went egocentric with a vengence!

Did anybody see Dean's consolation speech? And people want compare Bush to Hitler!

 

[GENIERE]

So far so good, but I’m surprised Edwards ran so strong. Could be the liberal young females doing their thing. I think Kerry will bomb out in the south, where I expected a strong surge from Clark. Now I feel Edwards may be problematic for Clark. My thoughts are that Edwards has been consistent in his opinions, while Clark’s positions often contradict his pre-campaign statements. Edwards’ good looks, youth and his steady subdued approach to campaigning may bear fruit.

 

[LURCH]

Had to come back and retract my own statement about Dean's speach (I hate it when I have to do this!).

When I wrote that statement in my previous post, I had only heard audio clips of the speech and seen still frames taken out of context. But this afternoon I finally found a video clip with the now-infamous portion of the speech AND the several seconds leading up to it. Howard Dean's speech was not a rant, he was not in a rage or out of controll. This was not an example of someone losing their temper. He was cheering.

This was an empassioned attempt to raise the spirits of his supporters, with positive attitude and enthusiasm, not anger. In the audio clips, he sounds like he should be on a pofessional wrestling program, but that's just the type of voice he has. If it were an actual loss of self-controll, that would be a major issue regarding his fitness to handle the pressures of the position he seeks, but discounting a man for his vocal talents (or lack thereof) is exactly the kind of politics I oppose; politics based on asthetics rather than substance.

So, to all Dean supporters, and Mr. Dean himslf (though I doubt he's reading this) I appologise for the missrep.

 

[wasteofo2]

" Democrats will have a choice of voting for Clark, Dean, or Nader."

Since when did Nader come into this?

 

[GENIERE]

Well perhaps because of the existence of the linked official Nader web site.

http://www.naderexplore04.org/

 

[LURCH]

Originally posted by wasteofo2
" Democrats will have a choice of voting for Clark, Dean, or Nader."

Since when did Nader come into this?

LOL! Now this is a coincidence. A good friend of mine was talking about a scenario very much like the one proposed in the opening post of this Topic, and he refers to it as Dean "Nadering" the ellection.