Jump to content

*official* 2008 us election thread


Daaaaave

Recommended Posts

Originally posted by Andy Jordan:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Daaaaave:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Edinho:

I still don't understand Hilary's popularity? Who exactly is rooting for her except those in New York state?

baby boomers, leathery feminists, blacks who hope she's the second coming of bill and the normal joe schmos who vote based on name recognition </div></BLOCKQUOTE>any poll data showing black support now that Obama is officially in the race?

he could really swing some states like Ohio, as long as Blackwell's no longer secretary of state there. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

somewhere between 65-70 for clinton vs 25-30 for obama currently.

Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Replies 15.3k
  • Created
  • Last Reply

I don't know about flip, I think(hope) blacks are a bit more savvy than to just vote the brotha in. 50-50 seems pretty reasonable. and either way, both candidates fighting over them is going to empower them in a way not seen since jesse jackson's run in 84 and should (hopefully) boost turnout for the winner in the general.

Link to post
Share on other sites

By Thomas Beaumont, Des Moines Register

DES MOINES — Former Iowa Gov. Tom Vilsack withdrew from the 2008 presidential campaign Friday, saying it was clear he would not be able to raise enough money to compete.

"It is money and only money that is the reason we are leaving today," he said at a news conference at his campaign headquarters, flanked by his wife, Christie, and his two sons, Doug and Jess.

Vilsack had said he would win the leadoff Iowa caucuses. He had been trailing three better-known candidates in the state, according to early polls.

Vilsack had returned to Iowa Thursday after participating in a multicandidate forum in Nevada. He had been campaigning in Iowa earlier in the week and had campaign events planned for Fairfield and Ottumwa this evening.

Prior to that, Vilsack had spent 17 days campaigning outside of Iowa, making key speeches on Iraq and energy policy in front of influential activists and donors. He had also appeared on "The Tonight Show," in an attempt to raise his low name identification.

Vilsack, who announced his candidacy in November, continued to rank at the bottom of national polls, registering support from about 1 percent in most national surveys of Democratic presidential preference.

However, sources said the deciding factor was that Vilsack's challenge to raise the estimated $20 million to compete through the early nominating contests, including the Iowa caucuses, was becoming too difficult.

He reported raising $1 million from Nov. 9 to Jan. 31.

However, his rivals were expected to have raised far more in the early part of 2007. Vilsack also had planned to campaign in the first-in-the-nation primary state, New Hampshire, Monday and Tuesday.

Vilsack had said he would win the leadoff Iowa caucuses. He had been trailing three better-known candidates in the state, according to early polls.

Link to post
Share on other sites

new rasmussen poll...

Clinton 37% Obama 26% Edwards 13% Richardson 5%

zogby...

Democrats

Clinton 33%

Obama 25%

Edwards 12%

Richardson 5%

Biden 2%

Clark 1%

Someone else 3%

Not sure 20%

General Election

Giuliani 47%, Clinton 40%

Giuliani 40%, Obama 46%

Giuliani 46%, Edwards 40%

McCain 47%, Clinton 39%

McCain 40%, Obama 44%

McCain 47%, Edwards 38%

Romney 35%, Clinton 45%

Romney 29%, Obama 51%

Romney 32%, Edwards 47%

Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by AllStar4:

Wow, apparently Obama can get a lot more votes from the neutral 20%.

that 20% waiting for gore and clark. from what I'm reading, those voters will split 1) edwards 2) obama 3) clinton once gore finally makes it official he's not running and clark's campaign goes nowhere

Link to post
Share on other sites

No idea why the same pundits who made incessant 'Gore-bot' jokes for the last six years have suddenly decided he's a rock star. Maybe so they can get him to run and then can go back to dissing him. High school habits are so hard to let go.

At least the people that always liked Gore have been consistent, but they seem to forget his hideous 2000 campaign. Unless he's improved in that respect, he needs to steer clear of this race.

It'd be interesting to see if Richardson polls well regionally (in the W/SW). If he can't get that, he may never get enough buzz to break into the Clinton-Obama-Edwards top flight. He needs to show that he can bring in the 'new' democrats out West, and if he does, he'll probably be a factor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by bflaff:

It'd be interesting to see if Richardson polls well regionally (in the W/SW). If he can't get that, he may never get enough buzz to break into the Clinton-Obama-Edwards top flight. He needs to show that he can bring in the 'new' democrats out West, and if he does, he'll probably be a factor.

It's sort of a vicious circle. If Clinton-Obama-Edwards keep sucking up all the oxygen, nobody else will be able to get any traction.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Andy Jordan:

poor Wesley, he'd be such a good candidate.

I disagree. you think swiftboating was bad, there are soldiers coming out of the woodwork who are dying for a chance to take clark apart. and if you take away the gen. (ret.) in front of his name, he's just a finger-in-the-air vanity candidate.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Jason the Yank:

Richardson numbers kind of encouraging, basically top of the 2nd tier despite being in New Mexico.

angling for a vp slot, which I think is the smart play for him. hispanic and west votes for hillary, great cv to add "gravitas" to obama or edwards.

only things weighing him back (for vp, not pres) are the rumors of another zipper/trousergate and some people wonder about his ability to draw since he couldn't even turn nm-1 blue in the madrid/wilson in an overwhelming dem year. patricia madrid shot herself in the foot a couple of times, which is a mitigating factor.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Gallup. 2/9-11. Adults. MoE 3%

If your party nominated a well-qualified Candidate For WH '08 who was _, would you vote for that person?

..................................Yes No

Catholic......................95 4

Black..........................94 5

Jewish........................92 7

A woman....................88 11

Hispanic......................87 12

Mormon......................72 24

Married for third time..67 30

72 years old................57 42

A homosexual.............55 43

An atheist...................45 53

Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Daaaaave:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jason the Yank:

Richardson numbers kind of encouraging, basically top of the 2nd tier despite being in New Mexico.

angling for a vp slot, which I think is the smart play for him. hispanic and west votes for hillary, great cv to add "gravitas" to obama or edwards.

</div></BLOCKQUOTE>

The interior West will sooner vote for Satan himself than Hillary. No VP choice is going to help her.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I'm not entirely sure. from what I've been reading, a good measure of the boom in those states (that is, nevada, arizona, new mexico and colorado) are coming from baby boomer and retiring californians.

enough to win an interior west state? I wouldn't bet on it. but it might be enough to make the gop spend extra resources there to secure the state and open up ohio and/or florida.

Link to post
Share on other sites

might as well close the thread folks, because gore's got it sewn up.

http://abcnews.go.com/Politics/story?id=2907998&page=1&CMP=OTC-RSSFeeds0312

Al Gore Will Not Only Run, but He Can and Will Win in '08

With an Oscar Appearance, and a Hit Documentary Gore Is Suddenly Very Cool

OPINION By ANDY OSTROY

Feb. 27, 2007 — - Make no mistake: Former Vice President Al Gore will be our next president.

I am as confident about that assertion as I am that George W. Bush will go down in history as America's worst president ever. Gore is the right man at the right time, for many reasons. And it's clear that the momentum and buzz is shifting his way big time.

At Sunday's Oscar ceremony, Gore's movie producers took home the coveted prize for best feature documentary for "An Inconvenient Truth," his scorching red-flag raiser on global warming.

Gore joined them on stage and was graceful, poised and presidential. And it didn't hurt his hipness quotient any to be getting a little Leo DiCaprio love either. The politician also joined the Hollywood star on stage during the Oscars. That's right, Al Gore is suddenly cool.

It gets even better. In October, Gore will also likely be the recipient of the Nobel Peace Prize for being the planet's biggest advocate in the fight against climate change. His prestigious nomination in this exclusive club puts him in the company of such independent thinkers, statesmen and activists as Dr. Martin Luther King, President Jimmy Carter, Elie Wiesel and Mother Theresa.

Now let's talk chops. Gore's an enlisted Vietnam vet who served four terms in the U.S. House of Representatives, two terms in the Senate, and eight years as vice president in one of the most successful administrations ever. Let's not forget that he won the popular vote in 2000, and as many say, the Electoral College as well.

So wait, he's hip, he's brilliant, he's highly experienced. Is America ready for a real leader after two terms of a guy who makes Jim Carrey's "Dumb and Dumber" character seem downright cerebral? You bet your asinine Bush-isms it is.

I even have the perfect campaign slogan for Gore: "Imagine how it would've been."

Just imagine what the country would be like today had he become president in 2000 and not Bush. Imagine an America without this bloody debacle in Iraq. Imagine an America that commands the respect of its allies and is feared by its enemies. Imagine an America that puts the environment before big corporate interests. Imagine having a president who strives to bridge the gap between rich and poor, where the middle class, not the wealthy, gets the tax breaks, and where the minimum wage is not a shameful $5.15. Pretty powerful stuff on the campaign trail, huh?

Andy Ostroy is editor and publisher of The Ostroy Report, a New York-based blog that aggressively combats the powerful right-wing spin machine, taking on Bush, the Republican Party and the conservative media.

Yes indeed, 2008 is the right time for Al Gore. Don't think for a minute that he doesn't know this. It's not 2000, and Gore is a changed man, an older, wiser, more relaxed, confident version of his former self.

What's more, the country is as different a place for him today as it was in '68 for that other "Comeback Kid," Richard Nixon.

When Gore announces, which I suspect he will likely do in September, Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton will have canceled each other out, and he will leapfrog over the carnage to the front of the line.

At that time, he'll have tremendous political and financial currency and support from which to launch a successful campaign. And in this writer's opinion, John McCain, Rudy Giuliani and Mitt Romney will be coughing up dust.

Andy Ostroy is editor and publisher of The Ostroy Report, a New York-based blog that aggressively combats the powerful right-wing spin machine, taking on Bush, the Republican Party and the conservative media.

Copyright © 2007 ABC News Internet Ventures

Link to post
Share on other sites

game, set, match AJ.

Blacks Shift To Obama, Poll Finds

By Dan Balz and Jon Cohen

Washington Post Staff Writers

Wednesday, February 28, 2007; Page A01

The opening stages of the campaign for the 2008 Democratic presidential nomination have produced a noticeable shift in sentiment among African American voters, who little more than a month ago heavily supported Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton but now favor the candidacy of Sen. Barack Obama.

Clinton, of New York, continues to lead Obama and other rivals in the Democratic contest, according to the latest Washington Post-ABC News poll. But her once-sizable margin over the freshman senator from Illinois was sliced in half during the past month largely because of Obama's growing support among black voters.

In the Republican race, former New York mayor Rudolph W. Giuliani, who recently made clear his intentions to seek the presidency, has expanded his lead over Sen. John McCain of Arizona. Giuliani holds a 2 to 1 advantage over McCain among Republicans, according to the poll, more than tripling his margin of a month ago.

The principal reason was a shift among white evangelical Protestants, who now clearly favor Giuliani over McCain. Giuliani is doing well among this group of Americans despite his support of abortion rights and gay rights, two issues of great importance to religious conservatives. McCain opposes abortion rights.

Among Democrats, Clinton still enjoys many of the advantages of a traditional front-runner. Pitted against Obama and former senator John Edwards of North Carolina, she was seen by Democrats as the candidate with the best experience to be president, as the strongest leader, as having the best chance to get elected, as the closest to voters on the issues and as the candidate who best understands the problems "of people like you." Obama was seen as the most inspirational.

The Post-ABC News poll was completed days after aides to the two leading Democrats engaged in a testy exchange over comments critical of Clinton and her husband, former president Bill Clinton, by Hollywood mogul David Geffen, a former friend and financial backer of the Clintons who held a fundraiser for Obama last week in Los Angeles.

Early national polls are not always good predictors for presidential campaigns, but the Post-ABC poll offers clues to the competition ahead.

On the January weekend when she announced her candidacy, Clinton led the Democratic field with 41 percent. Obama was second at 17 percent, Edwards was third at 11 percent and former vice president Al Gore, who has said he has no plans to run, was fourth at 10 percent.

The latest poll put Clinton at 36 percent, Obama at 24 percent, Gore at 14 percent and Edwards at 12 percent. None of the other Democrats running received more than 3 percent. With Gore removed from the field, Clinton would gain ground on Obama, leading the Illinois senator 43 percent to 27 percent. Edwards ran third at 14 percent. The poll was completed the night Gore's documentary film "An Inconvenient Truth" won an Academy Award.

Clinton's and Obama's support among white voters changed little since December, but the shifts among black Democrats were dramatic. In December and January Post-ABC News polls, Clinton led Obama among African Americans by 60 percent to 20 percent. In the new poll, Obama held a narrow advantage among blacks, 44 percent to 33 percent. The shift came despite four in five blacks having a favorable impression of the New York senator.

African Americans view Clinton even more positively than they see Obama, but in the time since he began his campaign, his favorability rating rose significantly among blacks. In the latest poll, 70 percent of African Americans said they had a favorable impression of Obama, compared with 54 percent in December and January.

Overall, Clinton's favorability ratings dipped slightly from January, with 49 percent of Americans having a favorable impression and 48 percent an unfavorable impression. Obama's ratings among all Americans improved over the past month, with 53 percent saying they have a favorable impression and 30 percent saying they have an unfavorable impression.

Her position on the war in Iraq does not appear to be hurting Clinton among Democrats, even though she has faced hostile questioning from some voters about her 2002 vote authorizing President Bush to go to war. Some Democrats have demanded that she apologize for the vote, which she has declined to do.

The Post-ABC News poll found that 52 percent of Democrats said her vote was the right thing to do at the time, while 47 percent said it was a mistake. Of those who called it a mistake, however, 31 percent said she should apologize. Among Democrats who called the war the most important issue in deciding their 2008 candidate preference, Clinton led Obama 40 to 26 percent.

In the Republican contest, McCain was once seen as the early, if fragile, front-runner for his party's nomination, but Giuliani's surge adds a new dimension to the race. In the latest poll, the former New York mayor led among Republicans with 44 percent to McCain's 21 percent. Last month, Giuliani led with 34 percent to McCain's 27 percent.

Former House speaker Newt Gingrich of Georgia ran third in the latest poll with 15 percent, while former Massachusetts governor Mitt Romney was fourth with 4 percent. Gingrich has not said he definitely plans to run, and without him, Giuliani's lead would increase even more, to 53 percent compared with McCain's 23 percent.

When Republicans were asked to rate Giuliani, McCain and Romney on a series of attributes, Giuliani was seen as the strongest leader, the most inspiring, the candidate with the best chance of winning the general election, the most honest and trustworthy and the one closest to them on the issues. McCain was seen as having the best experience to be president, but only by a narrow margin.

Giuliani faces potential problems because of his views on abortion and gay rights. More than four in 10 Republicans said they were less likely to support him because of those views. More than two in 10 Republicans said there was "no chance" they would vote for him.

With Clinton and Obama as possible barrier-breakers in this presidential campaign, Americans were asked how a candidate's race or sex would affect their vote. What the poll showed is that Americans indicated they were less likely to support a candidate older than 72 or a candidate who is a Mormon than a female or black candidate.

Those findings could affect McCain, who is 70, and Romney, who is a Mormon. Nearly six in 10 said they would be less likely to vote for someone older than 72, while three in 10 said they would be less likely to support a Mormon.

The Post-ABC News poll was conducted by telephone Feb. 22-25 among a random sample of 1,082 adults, including an oversample of 86 black respondents. The margin of sampling error for the poll was plus or minus three percentage points; it is higher for the sub-samples.

so blacks are going to Obama's side in droves, eh?

I expect to see Obama chip at Clinton's lead even further; once the campaign heats up, his grace and poise will surely be of even greater import.

Link to post
Share on other sites

a poll out for georgia by a republican-backed firm

"Among Democrats, Sen. Hillary Clinton (at 28%) is three insignificant points ahead of Sen, Barack Obama (25%) in the Democratic primary; former Sen. John Edwards trails with 18%."

if even close to accurate, this is bad, bad news for the edwards campaign.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Daaaaave:

I'm not entirely sure. from what I've been reading, a good measure of the boom in those states (that is, nevada, arizona, new mexico and colorado) are coming from baby boomer and retiring californians.

enough to win an interior west state? I wouldn't bet on it. but it might be enough to make the gop spend extra resources there to secure the state and open up ohio and/or florida.

The question is what those Californians look like. It's not the tax-hating right-wingers who left in the '70s, but I don't think they're granola-cruncing hippies either.

As for forcing the GOP to spend extra resources, I highly doubt Florida will open in the event of a Hillary candidacy. Ohio, maybe.

Link to post
Share on other sites

my guess is that they're pete wilson voters and "reagan democrats". the type of "centrists" hillary's looking to cultivate and the gop are afraid to lose.

with jeb out and 06 congressional gains, florida might not be 2000 close but I don't think it'll be 2004 distant either.

what happens to castro between now and then and how the bush administration responds to it will play a factor as well

Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Daaaaave:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jason the Yank:

Depends. Those folks tend to be socially liberal and fiscally conservative. More like Giuliani fodder, probably.

assuming rudy makes it through the primaries. I'm still rooting for brownback </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Not sure about Brownback. It'll probably depend on his fund-raising, but ATM I don't see him getting enough support for anything more than the VP nod.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by Splendid:

<BLOCKQUOTE class="ip-ubbcode-quote"><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-title">quote:</div><div class="ip-ubbcode-quote-content">Originally posted by Jason the Yank:

Depends. Those folks tend to be socially liberal and fiscally conservative. More like Giuliani fodder, probably.

Was speaking in context of the Obama-Clinton race. </div></BLOCKQUOTE>

Daaaaave and me were speaking in context of the general. icon_razz.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

good article, sums up prevailing pundit wisdom pretty well, I think.

The secret Obama meeting

All around the Hill and K Street, Democratic staffers and lobbyists with affection for Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton (D-N.Y.) are being recruited to come and hear a pitch for Sen. Barack Obama (D-Ill.).

Obama’s appeal to inside-the-Beltway Democrats, a significant slice of Hollywood and the energetic netroots community has, in a few short months, transformed him into the chief alternative to Hillary Clinton, clearly outdistancing former Sen. John Edwards (N.C.) and all the other 2008 Democratic presidential contenders.

Count me as a former skeptic. Just four months ago, I wrote in this column that “Obama is overrated.†Technically, this comment might still be true, as Obama’s stratospheric public image is hard to live up to, but his recent performance has nearly matched his clippings.

Obama’s rise is attributable both to his political skills and to Democrats’ anti-war fervor and post-midterm confidence. Their sense is that any reasonable Democratic candidate could win in ’08, so why not have a candidate who has always been strongly against the war in Iraq, like Obama, rather than one, like Clinton, who has been dragged inch by inch into opposition?

For current and former Hill staffers, their interest in Obama has been furtive. Many worked in, or at least very much admired, the Clinton administration. And it’s not a great career move to support Hillary’s opponent, if she ultimately waltzes into the White House. Even so, Democrats are intrigued enough to attend the meetings and hear more.

Hollywood has a similar restlessness. Of course, much of Tinseltown will support Clinton as they supported her husband, but many in Hollywood have been complaining for years about Clinton’s move to the middle, and they view her vote on the war as unforgivable. But most of all, the David Geffen dust-up shows that the top tier in the Democratic primary has narrowed to two — Clinton and Obama.

Conventional wisdom holds that when two top candidates attack each other, the third is benefited. But in the Geffen incident, it is just the opposite. John Edwards (John who?) was completely left out of the equation. Those in Hollywood who are willing to break from Clinton are heading to Obama’s camp and nowhere else.

If the caucuses and primaries began today, John Edwards would do well because of his strong organization in Iowa and his labor support. But if Obama clearly outdistances Edwards in the money race, as he is likely to do, Edwards’s strengths will dry up quickly.

Finally, the netroots liberal activists have gravitated to Obama as their candidate. It took Howard Dean until the beginning of the summer to ride the wave of their support, but Obama has it now.

Obama has harnessed Democratic confidence and anti-war sentiment by combining two seemingly incompatible attributes. He is at once the anti-war candidate, appealing to liberals who want red meat on the war, and the fresh-faced moderate persona who wants a new, less-divisive politics. And despite what skeptics say, Obama will win the black vote.

All this said, Hillary Clinton is still the frontrunner, with many more strengths than John Kerry had in 2004. But, unless Al Gore jumps in the race, she will have to fight one major candidate who is uniting the opposition to her, rather than many who are dividing it.

Obama’s Achilles’ heel is still his inexperience, which either Hillary Clinton or the Republican nominee could exploit. Do we want someone with so little experience running our country in a post-Sept. 11 world?

Then again, if Obama continues his rise, those meetings might not have to be secret anymore.

Link to post
Share on other sites

I will add a caveat though. obama winning outright liberal netroots is only accurate in a head-to-head with clinton.

edwards still claims a good deal of support (despite the blow up about the bloggers) and there's a sizable segment that will not budge in any direction until gore and clark make their final intentions clear.

my guess right now would be something along the lines of

edwards - 25

obama - 25

clinton - 10

undecided/uncommitted - 30

other (mostly richardson and kucinich) - 10

Link to post
Share on other sites

officially, I welcome anyone joining the race. the richer field gives voters a real chance to pick someone closest to their values and allows true vetting of the candidates.

unofficially, I worry that gore's announcing would be something of a storm in a teacup. a ton of inital media blitz and then not a lot of traction to carve out a new position. since this already looks to be the longest campaign in history, adding another prominant face runs the risk of overkill and turning off voters.

this is said as someone who is basically in obama's camp now. but should gore run, and should he win the primary, I would work on his campaign wholeheartedly.

Link to post
Share on other sites

he was a complete unknown in 2004 with 6 years of senate experience under his belt, and a charismatic but empty stump. from where he started, to finish 2nd in the primaries showed his promise (as well as the weakness of the field, tbh).

since then, he's gained the experience of a nationwide campaign, filled his cv with work internationally in africa and domestically on poverty, and retains much of staff he built in 2004.

I'm sure the post has long since been purged, but jason may be able to back me when I say that I called edwards to be a player in early/mid 2003 when no one here had even heard of him and he was polling < 5% nationally.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Originally posted by JK Galgreefe:

might as well close the thread folks, because gore's got it sewn up.

But in typical Gore fashion, when everything is looking good for him, something is revealed that completely cripples him. icon14.gif

Link to post
Share on other sites

"The power coming into their residence is green, renewable power," she said, explaining that the Gores participate in a program called Green Power Switch, which is run through the public Tennessee Valley Authority. Green Power Switch supplies energy from renewable sources to its members.

Kreider added that a renovation of the Gores' house is underway to make it more energy efficient, an update that will include the addition of solar panels.

Link to post
Share on other sites

Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    • No registered users viewing this page.
×
×
  • Create New...

Important Information

This site uses cookies - We have placed cookies on your device to help make this website better. You can adjust your cookie settings, otherwise we'll assume you're okay to continue.