Primaries

Remove all ads!

I'm surprised no one has started one of these....

Iowa Primaries:

Democratic -- Hilary suffered a huge hit here placing third. Granted, it was not by much. I think the biggest news was Edwards. The only issue for his campaign is money (which placing 2nd in Iowa may help his funding). I think if he wins the primaries, he will be the next president. I am doubtful enough voters would overcome prejudice and vote in a black man or a woman (I'd still vote for Obama if he's not running against McCain).

Republican -- Romney's loss was huge, especially with McCain leading in NH polls. He may be out of the race very soon. McCain had reasonable support given he did not campaign at all in Iowa. Huckabee ... it will be interesting to see how his campaign progresses.

 

Well Huckabee HAS been rising in the polls in the past couple of months.

To me, the biggest surprise was not that Obama won but by the margin by which he defeated Hillary. I mean, Hillary didn't even finish second. I have said in the past that I like Edwards the most out of the potential canidates, although I still think he is a long shot to win the nomination. Assuming the nomination goes to either Obama or Clinton, I would favor Obama.

 

I'm going to hold on to the hope that Iowa isn't really representative of the country as a whole. A large majority of caucus-goers identified themselves as fundamentalist Christians, and they were the ones to put Huckabee over the top. Outside of that group, however, he finished a distant third or fourth.

Not that the PA primary will actually matter, but maybe I'll vote for Huckabee anyway, just to give the Democrat a better chance at success.

 

Democratic: This was shocking and hurt Hillary. I'm almost curious if this is a "Dewey Wins" situation in which the media so badly want her, that they are ignoring what the people want. I have always thought that her negatives will torpedo her campaign. Unfortunatly I agree with T2 and do not believe the country is ready to vote for a black man. Edwards may very well come out of nowhere and take the nomination.

Republican- Huckabee has to be the candidate that the Democrats most want to win. He has a lot of negatives that many conservatives don't like. He seems to be running on his religion. I don't see Romney dropping out anytime soon as he actually looks the most presidential and that will carry him for a while. His Mormonism will eventually be his downfall as too many Christians won't be able to live with it. Thompson (who for disclosure purposes I like) is running an abysmal campaign and it almost seems as if he doesn't want to be in the running anymore. That leaves McCain, Guiliani, and Paul as the remaining well known candidates. If I had to guess, I would pick Guiliani will come out on top.

 

I completely agreed with your point about voters not supporting a black man...until last night, when that same black man took a huge victory in a state that is over 95% white. That did a lot to alleviate my fears about how he'll play nationally. Now if he can successfully deflect the "he's really a muslim" idiocy that's being emailed around, I think he's in good shape.

I'm glad Hillary took a hit (3rd must have stung something aweful), and I still like Edwards as my strong second choice. But my money is still on Obama, now more than ever.

As for the Republicans - even though he came in 4th, I now think McCain has the best shot. Huckabee won Iowa, but on the back of only one of three major constituencies in the party - the evangelicals, who are plentiful in Iowa. The other two major groups - the security hawks and the fiscal cons - are gunning for him, big time. He has virtually no establishment support, and very little money. Plus, I honestly don't see a Republican candidate winning in this country who's got Rush Limbaugh vowing to crush him, and his listeners aren't called Ditto-heads for nothing.

Mitt the Tit dumped so much money into Iowa it'll be tough for him to recover from this (though he may surprise me, as he has plenty more to keep going), but he's so weak on his feet that he'd easily get trounced in a debate with either Edwards or Obama. And so far Fred Thompson is...in a coma? If he's waiting for his big moment to shine, he'd better get to it I'd say. He's even gone on record as saying he doesn't really want to be President, and he certainly acts like that's true. He had a great opportunity to break out of the pack when he entered the race, and he mostly blew it. Too bad, because I like him almost as much as I like McCain. Rudy, thankfully, is toast now, and Ron Paul is still in long-shot land. That leaves the only non-ridiculous Republican candidate, McCain. We'll see if he can make lemonade, and I hope he does.

My 2% of a quid, all the usual caveats apply.

 

This election process is very complicated. I'm not sure I understand it. Do people have to vote for a candidate for a party and then vote for a president later? Does everyone get to vote or just people who belong to the party?

 

DR, I think you're discounting Guiliani way too early, he has made it quite clear that he will put his money on the big states and ignore these early primaries knowing that his chances of success in them is slim.

I was not really surprised to see Obama win but Edwards as second was surely surprising, in any case Iowa won't be the world for any one of the candidates and the race is still on for both sides.

 

I'm glad that Hillary lost. That makes me happy.

 

Each state has different rules. The way it typically works (and this is way to short of an explanation) is that in the primaries you vote for the party you are registered for. However, independents get to chose which party they want to vote for when they get there, but they can only pick one.

After all of the primaries/caucuses the parties have their conventions in which they figure out who will get the nomination.

Then in the general election people can vote for whatever candidate they want to.

Then the electoral votes (by state not popular) are added up and we have an eventual winner (after the lawsuits are settled )

 

I think people are discounting Iowa too much. Sure, it isn't representative of the nation, but the nation as a whole seems to be in an 'enough with politicians' mood again. This means we are looking for whoever seems like the least established washingtonite. That will fall to Obama for the democrats and Huckabee for the republicans every time.

Also, Huckabee has a lot more going for him than just the evangelical block. He's a real social conservative (which a LOT of conservatives find to be the reason they call themselves conservatives) and an economic progressive, which is what most Christians called themselves until the Reagan years. That combination is going to appeal to a lot of republicans and independants alike, though democrats will likely go for Obama.

I'm guessing Obama will make a rather clear lead, with Hillary winning a few states and coming second in many others, but not seriously threatening Obama. The republicans will be more interesting, but I expect Huckabee will win by a noticable margin. After that, the actual election will probably fall along party lines, meaning the two big factors will be who can get the most people to the polls and who gets the most independants.

 

@ Morg,

We'll see about Giuliani, but he also made it quite clear that he was going to make his stand in New Hampshire. Then pulled out, staking a claim on South Carolina. And so on, now claiming that Florida is all that matters. His strategy is a losing one, I think.

There are also some deal-breaking realities he has to contend with. One, his support nationally has plummeted in the last month. Two, he'll never get the vote of the social conservatives (not with an accused pedophile on his staff that he refuses to cut loose, a record of friendliness to gays and a handful of divorces), who now have their man in Huckabee. Three, no Presidential candidate has ever placed less than 3rd in the Iowa caucuses and gone on to win the nomination. McCain, at 4th, has a real shot at breaking this trend. But at 6th place? I don't think so. I mean Ron Paul got nearly TWICE the votes that Rudy did, and Thompson came in 3rd without even trying.

He may well win Florida. But by then I think it'll be too late.

@ NOG,

I agree with you for the most part. Though I disagree with him on many issues, I genuinely like Huckabee. After the CNN/YouTube debate, I was taken aback by how often I felt he nailed the questions he was asked, and he really stood out to me as a sincere and genuine guy amongst the others (especially compared to Romney, who has got to be the biggest tool I've ever seen). Huck's extremely likeable, IMO. And if I had to settle for a Republican, I could probably live with him I suppose (pains me though it does to admit that about a man who compares gays to necropheliacs and thinks the Earth is 6000 years old). I just think he won't be able to withstand the torpedoing he's going to receive from the rest of his party in the coming weeks.

 

Guiliani has not even been campaigning in Iowa or New Hampshire, he has mainly concentrated his campaign on the big states now if that's a good strategy or not remains to be seen. Granted, history will be against him but I'd wait until Florida to say that he's toast.

I'm starting to like Obama more and more though and really hope he gets the nomination and becomes president, he certainly is very different from the most in my opinion and would be a very fresh face after the Bush-Clinton-Bush years. Of the republicans I can't find a single nominee that I find overly likeable except McCain who I regrettably don't think will make it. Ron Paul would certainly be fresh too but he's a bit too extreme for my tastes. Huckabee and Guilani have left a very untrustworthy picture of themselves from all that I've heard of them.

 

Iowa is not a primary, but a caucus. I'm really not trying to be technical about it, but in years past it was fairly meaningless, and a lot of important candidates could have cared less about it. Again, thank the corporate greed mongers in the media for placing all the hype over a caucus in which real votes are hardly cast - did you see the scrapes of paper stacked on the floor?

As for the results:

Obama - Oprah's candidate. Give me a break, and spare me from all the boo hooing soccer moms already....

Hillary - Who would she be without Bill? Just the thought of Bill back in the White House excites some of us, while it probably would require heavy drugs for Rush. That in itself would be priceless.

Edwards - He's the real deal, but will probably fall off soon. He's angry, and he should be, like the rest of us, over all the nonsense this country has been through the last 7 years.

Huckabee - Gee, shucks! He makes all the Democrats look great - and that's saying something. Rally has it right, as usual, that he would be a great asset for any Dem.

Mitt - Great Hair - too bad there's not much under it....

Thompson - Could not even act his way through Iowa - maybe it's the writers' strike.

McCain - Don't count him out, even if he is pretending to go along with Bush.

Guiliani - Don't count his guy out yet either. He's a tuff bird, (he even moved his mistress into the mayor's mansion before he was divorced).

That's all my contributions to the sound bytes of the last few days. Hype, Hype, Hype....

What's in store for my country? What about Iraq? What about Healthcare, education, Social Security and the economy? I don't want to hear about "Hope;" I don't want to hear about "Change," nor "Experience." I want to know what these "candidates" are going to DO about the issues. Specifics please, and lots of them would be helpful.

But hey, we have a Baptist preacher and a Mormon (just how many "wives" can a gay man have?) in the mix, so the issue of gay marriage is a forgone conclusion. I'm glad THAT one is solved. I would certainly not want to lose any more sleep over that one.

 

Considering the man's history, I bet he could tell you exactly what the price would be, right down to the penny.

 

I haven't been following things closely, but from what I know, Obama seems like a pretty good pick. Not because I think he'll do anything wonderful for America, will fulfill whatever grand campaign promises he makes, or generally be much good. Nope, don't think for a second that that'll be happening (so I exaggurate...).

What does make it look nice is his symbolic value. It shows that America might not be stuck in the same stupid political rut they've been in since I've been alive and probably back until ... no idea when. Obama is dancing around saying 'Hey look - we don't need to be the same as we always have been! Let's move on and do something worthwhile for once!' Now, that he's probably not going to do anything of the sort even if he becomes president is inconsequential, because at least it shows that people give a **** about fixing things if only in the mildest manner available.

There's a book - Winter's Tale by Mark Helprin - that has an interesting bit to it [minor spoilers follow]. One of the characters runs for mayor of New York. All the other candidates say the standard lines - 'we'll reduce crime, tax, blahdeblah'. This character promises that if he's elected, New York's winters will be the best ever and that it will snow every day. People vote for him because they know that all the politicians are lying, so they might as well vote for the one who tell's the best lies. Same kind of deal.

The only other candidate that seems to have any imagination at all is Ron Paul. The problem is that his imagination is scary as hell, while Obama's speaks of butterflies and sunshine. When telling amazing lies, it's best not to tell ones about selling the highways, because no one wants to pay a toll to use the highway even if there's no way in hell that's ever going to happen (I uh ... hope ).

Hillary is the obvious 'safe' way. Voting for her seems to be saying 'Yes! I want everything to be as normal please. No flash new politics for me!' John Edwards ... well, I have no idea what people think about him. I had to do a wiki search on him while writing this to see if he actually had any interesting ideas - yeah, don't think he does. At the least, he doesn't seem to have anything stunning that everyone else doesn't have as well.

On the Republican side (minus Ron Paul, who is already spoken for) - as far as I can tell they're all really scary in the 'oh ****, we elected a moron/protofascist/Christian supremist who's going to run us into the ground for another four years!'. Though, y'know, that's just a general impression from the few things I've picked up lurking in American-dominated forums.

I think I might add another disclaimer here because yes, I am talking out of my arse and don't really have any idea about these people except for vague rememberings of silly forum arguements and whatever the media's flinging.

 

Not to mention that the aforementioned state is considered one of the worst places in the entire country to be black. Not only do we have rampant profiling and one of the worst black incarceration rates in the country, but a lot of employers out here just won't hire black people. For Obama to win here....

 

Huh? Now I am even more confused. Let's put this another way. Which of YOU people gets to vote for something / someone next?

And how come there are so many candidates? Aren't there usually 2.5 candidates (a Democrat one, a Republican one, and an entertainment value protest one?) For example: Bush + Clinton + Perot?

 

Tal.

Early on anyone may run who wishes to and can get on the primary slate or for that matter just run. Of course without media attention or money to pay for advertisements they won't get far. After the primaries are over ...well, Tal said it.

Then the general population gets to go out and vote for whoever managed to get nominated by their party or however they get on the ballot. I don't know how independent candidates get on the ballot but I bet someone on the Board knows.

 

To join in with Harbourboy's ignorance about how the whole system works - when it comes down to the general election do you vote directly for who will be the next president, or is it a 'whichever party wins the most seats gets to form government' kind of deal?