Democrat Presidential nomination

Discussion in 'Politics' started by obviousman, Nov 11, 2003.

  1. obviousman
    Online

    obviousman Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Who do you think will win the Presidential nomination for the Democrats? Would you consider Howard Dean and John Edwards the front runners? Please say why too.
     
  2. dijetlo
    Online

    dijetlo Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    I kinda' hope Dean gets the nod. Not for any policy position he takes but for the way he's been able to raise money through the internet from individual small donors. This should give you some inkling that he's going to try to frame the larger debate as the little man against the special interests. He also has the advantage of having never spoken out in favor of the war. Some interesting numbers from here.
    Newsweek Poll conducted by Princeton Survey Research Associates. Nov. 6-7, 2003. N=1,002 adults nationwide. MoE ± 3.
    "Do you approve or disapprove of the way George W. Bush is handling the situation in Iraq?"
    Approve 42%
    Disapprove 51%
    Don't Know 7%

    This metric is also distrubing for the GWB camp. At 38 percent it doesn't constitute a plurality but it does appear to be steadily gaining ground over the duration of the polling numbers.

    "From what you know now, do think the United States did the right thing in taking military action against Iraq last March, or not?"
    11/6-7/03
    Right Thing 55%
    Not Right Thing 38%
    Don't Know 7%

    7/24-25/03
    Right Thing 68%
    Not Right Thing 28%
    Don't Know 4%

    10% in 4 months is significant. If you extrapolate that over the coming election year that puts the number at 78% of the country thinking the Iraqi war was the wrong thing to do come election 2004.
     
  3. 5stringJeff
    Offline

    5stringJeff Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 15, 2003
    Messages:
    9,990
    Thanks Received:
    536
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Puyallup, WA
    Ratings:
    +540
    First, Dean came out and flip-flopped his position on federal funding, because he has so much cash that he realizes that he would be held back by the federal funding limits.
    Second, Dean has taken the liberal high road, which is fine for the nomination, but the majority of voters are not going to vote for McGovern/Mondale Lite. Take Wes "I'm-for-the-War-no-I'm-against-the-War-no-I-don't-know-where-I-stand-on=the-War" Clark as the VP, great, it's not going to make a lick of difference.

    Still, all things considered, Dean, Clark, Gephardt, and Lieberman seem to be the top four. Edwards is a no-name nationally, Braun and Sharpton have a snowball's chance in hell, Kerry is trying to out-left Dean, but it won't work, and Kucinich is being openly supported by Green Party grassroots.

    My guess is Dean gets the nomination, and either Lieberman or Clark gets the VP nod.
     
  4. AmericanLiberal
    Offline

    AmericanLiberal Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    20
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +0
    dijetlo, do you really think Dean can win the general election? It may be cliche but the fact is that no northern liberal has won the presidency since JFK. Also, no Democrat has ever won the presidency without winning at least five or six southern states. If Dean wins the nomination it is hard to see him winning ANY southern states. He has strong support among Northeast liberals but I have a hard time imagining him winning in a head-to-head with Bush especially with Karl Rove managing the Bush campaign.

    Gephardt or Edwards have a better chance at winning. Edwards has a well-spelled out plan for medicare and Gephardt has strong standing in the Midwest states that will be important battlegrounds. Clark is very moderate but he hasn't proven himself as a speaker.
     
  5. dijetlo
    Online

    dijetlo Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Yea, but he can honestly point to his donors and make a strong case that the source of his money is so much "cleaner" than the Bush dollars that it could actually turn out to be a bonus for him.
    You should come up some time, the view is fantastic...:thup:
    I've never researched it but I don't think his record in Vermont was especially liberal. You allready see him moving towards the center, his policies are not going to be crafted to be unpopular, he'll need the independants to make a run at the Whitehouse, look for DemCon to produce a centrist platform and Dean to adopt it (if he gets that far.)
    .
    Dunno, you make a convincing argument that it's impossible. Your points about Gephardt and Edwards are also well taken. If Dean keeps funding himself with small donations, I'm going to have to back him. One of my primary bitches about politics is the influence of big money. Here's a chance to make my displeasure felt, I'd rather have a politician I disagree with but feel confident his primary allegiance is to me (the average voter). If Kacinich tanks, I think Ralph might run, he's allways worth a listen...
     
  6. obviousman
    Online

    obviousman Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Personally I don't think any democrat can win the next election. IF we're still dealing with Iraq, which right now is the most important part of the whole ordeal, I will have to vote Bush because I wouldn't want to have to switch leaders and policies during the middle of a crisis.
     
  7. X.P. Alidocious
    Online

    X.P. Alidocious Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Well, I really think it'll be Hillary. Until recently, I didn't think she'd
    run this time, but the media keeps dropping "hints." I'm reading
    them as build up.

    I could be wrong, but the other dems are looking rather weak
    right now, with the exception of Dean, who doesn't really
    seem to be a favorite with party leaders. She'd be a more
    viable candidate.
     
  8. AmericanLiberal
    Offline

    AmericanLiberal Rookie

    Joined:
    Nov 11, 2003
    Messages:
    20
    Thanks Received:
    0
    Trophy Points:
    1
    Ratings:
    +0
    XP, you are right the centrist Democrats have desperately been scrambling for an "anyone but Dean" candidate. Here are their options:

    Lieberman - pretender
    Kerry - contender, quickly becoming a pretender
    Edwards - long race, no traction, polls have him losing to Bush in his home state
    Gephardt - almost nobody takes him seriously; the fact that SEIU refused to endorse him is a huge embarassment
    Clarck - pretender. he made a big splash then sunk like a rock. he's running for Secretary of Defense, not president.

    So Hillary could get drawn (maybe dragged) in by the centrists. However I have not heard anything about her throwing her hat in the ring and every day that passes puts her at a bigger fundraising and organizing disadvantage.
     
  9. X.P. Alidocious
    Online

    X.P. Alidocious Guest

    Ratings:
    +0
    Good point. I hadn't thought about fundraising.
    I guess we'll just have to wait and see. Maybe
    Dean will pull this thing off.
     
  10. MtnBiker
    Offline

    MtnBiker Senior Member

    Joined:
    Sep 28, 2003
    Messages:
    4,327
    Thanks Received:
    230
    Trophy Points:
    48
    Location:
    Rocky Mountains
    Ratings:
    +230
    I don't believe Hillary will run in 04', just my gut feeling, she will only run if she believes she can win. However the Clintons are huge fund raisers that would not be a problem, oranization this late in the game would cause a challange.
     

Share This Page