Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
April 19, 2014, 09:34:37 am
HomePredMockPollEVCalcAFEWIKIHelpLogin Register
News: Please delete your old personal messages.

  Show Posts
Pages: 1 ... 127 128 129 130 131 [132]
3276  Election Archive / 2008 Elections / Re:My 2004/08/12 prediction.... on: February 16, 2004, 01:58:04 pm

So maybe a more interesting question is: Who will be a contender for a major party nomination in 2012 who is NOT currently a Governor or Senator?

My guesses on the Dem side:
Emanual (IL)
Herseth (SD)
Spitzer (NY)

Not sure about GOP.


One more Dem I forgot:
O'Malley (MD)...then in the middle of his second term as Gov!
3277  Election Archive / 2008 Elections / Re:My 2004/08/12 prediction.... on: February 16, 2004, 01:54:40 pm

2012

Dole/Owens (R) - 56%, 326 EVs
Clinton/Warner (D) - 43% 212 EVs

Elizabeth Dole will be 76 in 2012!  It strikes me that most people who are projecting the race into 2012 are picking candidates who are influential NOW, not who will be influential in eight years.

Consider this: Eight years ago, it would not have been a stretch to imagine John Kerry as the Dem nominee.  But his chief opponents were Edwards, Dean, and Clark.  Who could have guessed in 1996 that any of those three would be contenders in 2004?   Most of the 2012 candidates will be people who do not currently have national recognition.

So maybe a more interesting question is: Who will be a contender for a major party nomination in 2012 who is NOT currently a Governor or Senator?

My guesses on the Dem side:
Emanual (IL)
Herseth (SD)
Spitzer (NY)

Not sure about GOP.
3278  Election Archive / 2008 Elections / Re:My 2008 prediction.... on: February 14, 2004, 11:50:20 pm

I don't have a prediction for 2008, but how about this one:

In 2016, the Dem nominee will be Stephanie Herseth.


BTW, I think McCain at 68 will probably be too old to run in 2008, especially considering his previous health problems.  Also, I'm surprised no one has mentioned Ed Rendell as a Dem candidate.

3279  Election Archive / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election / Re:Nevada Caucus (Event) on: February 13, 2004, 06:01:14 pm

How about this one:

Kerry 55
Edwards 10
Dean 10
Others 5
Undecided 20

OK, I made that up, but does anyone expect anything different?

Nick
3280  Election Archive / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election / Re:Rally Behind Kerry! on: February 11, 2004, 04:00:05 pm
Of course Dems will rally behind Kerry when and if he is nominee.  But why is there any need to do so right now?  The whole reason that Kerry has won so many states already is that (IMHO) Dems were looking too quickly to rally behind the first candidate to show some electoral strength.

Shouldn't we allow at least a couple weeks of a one-on-one campaign between Kerry and Edwards going into Super Tuesday?  There haven't even been any real debates yet (with less than six candidates).  Sure, it looks EXTREMELY likely that Kerry will be the nominee, but shouldn't he have to prove himself in a one-on-one race before we crown him?

Nick
3281  Election Archive / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election / How are delegates apportioned on: February 05, 2004, 11:13:54 pm
My understanding is that a candidate needs 15% in a state to get delegates in a Democratic primary.  Once he reaches that threshold, delegates are awarded proportionally.  But looking at the latest round of primaries, I have two questions.

1.) Only Kerry got 15% in Delaware, yet Sharpton, who finished 6th, apparently got a delegate.  How?

2.) In the recent Missouri Primary, Kerry more than doubled Edwards, but only got 36 delegates compared to 26 for Edwards.  This hardly seems proportional.

Can anyone explain exactly how these delegates are apportioned?

Nick
3282  Election Archive / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election / Re:Kerry's VP on: February 05, 2004, 05:11:53 pm
What about Carl Levin as Kerry's VP

Does Carl Levin give Kerry anything other than geography?  He's 70 years old, and has had a pretty quiet Senate career.
3283  Election Archive / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election / Re:Kerry's VP on: February 05, 2004, 04:54:29 pm
Talking about Bentsen, could Edwards be the Bentsen of 2004? 1988 featured a Northeastern liberal with a Southern moderate running against a Bush. And Bentsen doesn't seem to have helped Dukakis a lot...

I don't think choosing a VP based on region works very well (well, maybe for Lincoln in 1864).  It's usually better to choose a VP who will add personal qualities that the Pres candidate lacks.   For this reason, I would see Edwards as a MUCH better pick than, for instance, Graham or Gephardt.

Nick

Why, did Lincoln really need to ensure Maine?

1864, not 1860.
Lincoln chose Andrew Johnson, who was from Tennessee and not even a Republican.
I believe Tennesse was reintroduced into the Union years before any other confederate state.
3284  Election Archive / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election / Re:Kerry's VP on: February 05, 2004, 03:16:00 pm
Talking about Bentsen, could Edwards be the Bentsen of 2004? 1988 featured a Northeastern liberal with a Southern moderate running against a Bush. And Bentsen doesn't seem to have helped Dukakis a lot...

I don't think choosing a VP based on region works very well (well, maybe for Lincoln in 1864).  It's usually better to choose a VP who will add personal qualities that the Pres candidate lacks.   For this reason, I would see Edwards as a MUCH better pick than, for instance, Graham or Gephardt.

Nick
3285  Election Archive / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election / Re:Kerry's VP on: February 05, 2004, 12:41:28 pm
One interesting thing to note is that candidates from both parties almost never choose Governors as running mates, even thought they are always cited as possibilities.  I think the last VP nominee who was a Gov was Spiro Agnew!

Nick
3286  Election Archive / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election / Re:Swing States from 2000 Election on: January 27, 2004, 03:03:05 pm
Here is an interesting map showing which states lean which way:





A most interesting view.

Separating the states into groups by voting patterns in last 4 cycles connects to our discussions here:

GRAY: unalterably Republican - disaster would have to strike for Bush to lose one of these

BLUE and TURQOISE: voted for Clinton once.
If they went against Dole in 96 we're calling them borderline in 2004 (FL, AZ).
If they went against GHW Bush in 92 we're calling them safe GOP (MT, CO, GA).

RED: all the southern states that the Dems are hoping an Edwards or Clark can win, plus NV, OH, and NH. I'd call these the conservative swing states, i.e., they swing between parties, but haven't voted for a perceived liberal. They went against Dukakis, for Clinton twice, against Gore.

WHITE: perhaps the most interesting is that of these 9 states, which voted Dem down the line, 5 (WA, OR, MN, WI, and IA) are considered up for grabs this time. That trend is not good news for the Democrats.

Democrats: You need some conservative Clinton RED and BLUE states. Not only are the YELLOW and WHITE (Gore) states not enough, but they're  in contention!

Factoring 1988 into the equation doesn't tell us anything important, the trends have shifted too much.  I think Dukakis lost South Dakota by only 6 points, but lost New Jersey by 14!

I think the map does break the states into three meaningful groups though:

1.) WHITE/YELLOW : Gore states.  Some are safe, some are swing, but the white state are more in danger than the yellow, if anything.  If GOP picks up even a couple of these, they've clinched it.

2.) RED/GREEN/TURQUOISE : Switched to GOP in 2000.  These are the states the Dems have to target if they want to win in 2004.  Like the above group, they only have to pick of a couple.

3.) BLUE/GREY : Safe GOP.  I don't see the Dems seriously competing in any of these.

Nick
3287  Election Archive / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election / Re:Official New Hampshire prediction thread on: January 26, 2004, 09:00:14 pm

My Prediction:

Kerry - 33%
Dean - 27%
Edwards - 19%
Clark - 12%
Lieberman - 8%
Kucinich - 1%

Nick
Dean too high there.

Maybe, but I'm anticipating somewhat of a Dean comeback.

Or maybe I'm just hoping for one.  I think only a strong Dean showing will prevent a Kerry blowout (which would start the press crowning him as the inevitable nominee).

Nick
3288  Election Archive / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election / Re:Official New Hampshire prediction thread on: January 26, 2004, 08:15:33 pm

My Prediction:

Kerry - 33%
Dean - 27%
Edwards - 19%
Clark - 12%
Lieberman - 8%
Kucinich - 1%

Nick
3289  Election Archive / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election / Re:Arizona Primary (Event) on: January 25, 2004, 10:47:05 pm
New Poll!

From ARG
Jan 23-25

Kerry 24
Clark 21
Edwards 15
Dean 10
Lieberman 7
Undecided 23

Nick
3290  Election Archive / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election / Re:South Carolina Primary Event on: January 25, 2004, 10:45:38 pm
New Poll!

From ARG
Jan 23-25

Edwards 21
Kerry 17
Sharpton 15
Clark 14
Dean 9
Lieberman 5
Undecided 18

http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/sc/
3291  Election Archive / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election / Re:Oklahoma Primary (Event) on: January 25, 2004, 10:43:38 pm
New Poll!  
From ARG
Jan 23-25

Clark 23
Edwards 18
Kerry 17
Lieberman 10
Dean 8
Undecided 22

http://www.americanresearchgroup.com/ok/
3292  Election Archive / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election / Re:North Dakota Caucus (Event) on: January 25, 2004, 06:06:36 pm
Hasn't North Dakota had some crazy results in the past?  I seem to remember it was once the last caucus, and not a single major Dem got on the ballot, so Lyndon LaRouche won.  I don't remember the year, and maybe it was South Dakota.

But this is clealy the least relevant contest on this date, right?

Nick
3293  Election Archive / 2004 U.S. Presidential Election / Re:2004 User Predictions - Discussion on: January 25, 2004, 06:00:04 pm
Hi all,

I'm new to this forum, but I'm a political obsessive and the discussions here are really cool.  

I just posted my prediction map....maybe a little optimistic for the Democrats, but I think pretty reasonable.  It assumes the Dems nominate someone with at least some Southern appeal.

I have five Bush states switching:
Ohio
Louisiana
Arkansas
Arizona
Nevada

Louisiana seems to be the Southern state most amendable to voting for a Democrat, even during the Bush-era.  (Gov '03, Sen '02, LA-03 in '02)

Maybe it's a few years to0 early to shift Arizona and Nevada to the Dem column, but I'm pretty confidence they'll shift eventually given their growth and demographic changes.

I see Bush holding on to West Virginia and Florida (unless Bob Graham is VP).  The GOP showed real strength in FL in '02, and Bush is trouncing every Dem in all polls there (same with NH, come to think).  And I think the declining influence of labor in WV has turned it into a "Southern state" for good.

Nick G
Pages: 1 ... 127 128 129 130 131 [132]


Login with username, password and session length

Logout

Powered by SMF 1.1.19 | SMF © 2013, Simple Machines