Who is the Dem choice?

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

The Republican race is wide open. McCain, the media party favorite, is the clear front runner, but I think his appeal is all name recognition. Once primary voters are exposed to his recent record, they will have second thoughts. Has a nasty temper and is thin-skinned.

Guiliani has a huge problem in that his police commissioner, that thug that Bush wanted to appoint head of Homeland Security, just copped a plea to a bribery charge and seems to be mobbed up. Rudy is way too far left for Republican primary voters anyway.

Frist has been pretty much a failure as Majority Leader, lacks name recognition and, to me at least, doesn't seem to have much in the way of command presence. He's got some messy issues with the family business HCA as well.

Romney is an outstanding leader, super smart and has a record of success in the private and public arenas. He's a moderate to conservative who got elected in Massachusetts, so he has broad appeal. The issue with him is his Mormon religion, which should not be a factor but could prove troublesome with evangelicals.

George Allen is a favorite of conservatives, but his constant efforts to be Reaganesque often come off as merely mushy and are getting tiresome. Needs to find an issue that he can demonstrate some passion on.

Newt Gingrich is a smart guy and good commentator but was a disaster as Speaker. Out of the game too long now to be a serious contender.

Rice is a joke. Never held public office and no one knows her views on most issues. Plus, she is linked to the Iraq disaster.

The problem for Republicans is that they have turned off their core supporters on a host of issues from spending to immigration to Iraq. Their key winning bloc is the religious right, and they are not pleased with what they have received in exchange for putting Republicans in charge of all three branches of government. The election shapes up as a kind of game of chicken between them and the party regulars, with the regulars feeling they will never vote for the party of gay marriage and abortion on demand. The religious bloc by contrast knows that if they sit out, Republicans lose. Maybe they lose anyway.

This race probably shapes up as a lengthy fight between McCain and Allen, unless McCain scares voters with a temper tantrum. Romney odds on VP choice.
More...

The media will assess this similar to the way you have, as the great repub divide, because they always do, but it is nothing compared to the dems, who have shown in conn that they are going down in flames. It was 52-48 as I remember, and the spin was that the whole country is against the war, and the media bought into it hook, line and sinker. All it really showed is that the dem party is split right down the middle, not the whole country. Dems will get fried in 08, who cares about mid-terms.
 
Quote from palmbeachdude:

The media will assess this similar to the way you have, as the great repub divide, because they always do, but it is nothing compared to the dems, who have shown in conn that they are going down in flames. It was 52-48 as I remember, and the spin was that the whole country is against the war, and the media bought into it hook, line and sinker. All it really showed is that the dem party is split right down the middle, not the whole country. Dems will get fried in 08, who cares about mid-terms.
More...

Democrats face an interesting choice.
 
Voters are the ones who face the choice.

People didn't predict Kerry running, Clinton came out of nowhere in 2000.

So much may change in a couple of years.

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

Democrats face an interesting choice.
More...
 
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

Voters are the ones who face the choice.

People didn't predict Kerry running, Clinton came out of nowhere in 2000.

So much may change in a couple of years.
More...


I agree with you, dems can't be considered voters. At least not serious ones.:D
 
Quote from ZZZzzzzzzz:

Voters are the ones who face the choice.

People didn't predict Kerry running, Clinton came out of nowhere in 2000.

So much may change in a couple of years.
More...

That's what makes it interesting. A year is a long time in politics, and we can't predict how voters will feel as the primary season unfolds.

Clearly the Democrat Party has an anti-war, pacificist base that has a lot of sway in primaries. It has been there for nearly 40 years, so I don't think it is going to disappear in a year. But that base has not produced many national triumphs. In fact, the Democrats' few national wins, other than LBJ, were produced by candidates(Clinton and Carter) who ran as southern moderates, even though they were extremely liberal once safely in office.

I see it as a risky gamble for a candidate to adopt a Lamont-like, cut and run platform. A marginal candidate like a Feingold or a fallen star like a Gore could use it to get back in contention, but the frontrunner, Hillary, clearly sees only danger to the left.
 
So much depends on what economy and Iraq are in a couple of years are, what is price of gasoline, etc.

Terrorist events, etc.

Waaay to early to make proclamations either way.

Quote from AAAintheBeltway:

That's what makes it interesting. A year is a long time in politics, and we can't predict how voters will feel as the primary season unfolds.

Clearly the Democrat Party has an anti-war, pacificist base that has a lot of sway in primaries. It has been there for nearly 40 years, so I don't think it is going to disappear in a year. But that base has not produced many national triumphs. In fact, the Democrats' few national wins, other than LBJ, were produced by candidates(Clinton and Carter) who ran as southern moderates, even though they were extremely liberal once safely in office.

I see it as a risky gamble for a candidate to adopt a Lamont-like, cut and run platform. A marginal candidate like a Feingold or a fallen star like a Gore could use it to get back in contention, but the frontrunner, Hillary, clearly sees only danger to the left.
More...
 
Another partisan hack, you will have lots of friends here....

Quote from palmbeachdude:

I agree with you, dems can't be considered voters. At least not serious ones.:D
More...
 
Quote from Maverick74:

You betcha. I think Lieberman could probably beat most of the republicans in the 08 field in a primary. I would vote for Lieberman over almost all of them. It's not so much that I agree with him on the issues or over Iraq, it's that he is bar none one of the most honest and has more integrity then most in Washington. I think most republicans will be more then happy to adopt Lieberman into the party. I mean think about it. Is there really that much difference between Lieberman and McCain?
More...
Yes, Lieberman votes 90% liberal (about the same as Hillary). McCain is about 60% conservative.

Whether you call that difference large depends on what "large" means. Both are pretty liberal.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top