Running Mates
       |           

Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
March 19, 2024, 02:45:45 AM
News: Election Simulator 2.0 Released. Senate/Gubernatorial maps, proportional electoral votes, and more - Read more

  Talk Elections
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  Running Mates
« previous next »
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5
Author Topic: Running Mates  (Read 15494 times)
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,767


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #50 on: January 24, 2004, 07:34:40 PM »

Seriously, at this time, and after seeing Clark on the campaign trail, I'd say Kerry - Edwards would be a stronger ticket.   Clark has made some really stupid statements over the last month.  He'd be spending a heck of a lot of time playing defense due to his flipflops.  Plus it appears the media doesn't like him either and we know what they can do to a candidate when they want to.

No, Edwards would make a better running mate IMO.  He's not going to bring along any southern states, but he's a lot more seasoned than Clark, more polished, and much less likely to put his foot in his mouth than Clark.

Yes, I agree with all of that. Also, if Edwards can force Bush to campaign in the South, that could be good too.

Btw, I just saw on a Swedish page that a Newseek poll published today gives Kerry a victory over Bush, 49-46. Anyone else see this?
Logged
agcatter
agcat
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,740


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #51 on: January 24, 2004, 08:13:24 PM »

Forcing Bush to spend SOME resources in the South would be helpful to the Democrats no doubt about it.  However, with Kerry at the top of the ticket it's obvious that the Dems have turned their strategy towards winning with zero EVs from the South.  They will have to pry Ohio loose from Bush.  That represents their best hope even though it's still up hill.
Logged
agcatter
agcat
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,740


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #52 on: January 24, 2004, 08:25:26 PM »

I did indeed see that poll.  A poll taken at the same time by Opinion Dynamics showed Bush leading Kerry 49 - 42 so who knows.  Thing is, these polls right now are being taken while only a relatively small portion of the electorate is being tuned in.  They are very fluid and appear to fluctuate with whoever has a good week and Kerry has had a very good week.
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #53 on: January 24, 2004, 08:32:24 PM »

I did indeed see that poll.  A poll taken at the same time by Opinion Dynamics showed Bush leading Kerry 49 - 42 so who knows.  Thing is, these polls right now are being taken while only a relatively small portion of the electorate is being tuned in.  They are very fluid and appear to fluctuate with whoever has a good week and Kerry has had a very good week.
Well Faux's poll has Bush doing better than he is the Newsweek poll...big surprise...but polls mean less than nothing at this point.  the only interesting stat in the NEwsweek poll is that 52% don't want to see Bush re-elected in 2004.  Only 1006 were sampled, so it doesn't matter.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,767


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #54 on: January 25, 2004, 07:47:47 AM »

I did indeed see that poll.  A poll taken at the same time by Opinion Dynamics showed Bush leading Kerry 49 - 42 so who knows.  Thing is, these polls right now are being taken while only a relatively small portion of the electorate is being tuned in.  They are very fluid and appear to fluctuate with whoever has a good week and Kerry has had a very good week.
Well Faux's poll has Bush doing better than he is the Newsweek poll...big surprise...but polls mean less than nothing at this point.  the only interesting stat in the NEwsweek poll is that 52% don't want to see Bush re-elected in 2004.  Only 1006 were sampled, so it doesn't matter.

How many people are usually sampled? In Sweden it's 1000...

Isn't it most likely that, disregarding all other factors, Bush will lose some as we approach election, since the eventual nominee will get the spotlight, undecideds go against the incumbant, the challenger's name recognition increases, etc?

I think Kerry being within 7% is surprisingly good, not long ago all Dems were double digits behind.

Agcat, I agree that Ohio is a key state. If the Dems can win it, they have a chance. They should go for the steel states. If the Dem can win Ohio, Pennsylvania and West Virginia they have a good chance of winning the election.
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #55 on: January 25, 2004, 09:42:00 AM »

The major news services usually poll 1000, the minor ones sink as low as 300.  But more people are surveyed as we get closer to election day.
Logged
7,052,770
Harry
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 35,166
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #56 on: January 25, 2004, 10:22:51 AM »

Kinda stupid to take 106; then the percentages just get a little of . . . why not 100 or 150?
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #57 on: January 25, 2004, 12:01:17 PM »

Kinda stupid to take 106; then the percentages just get a little of . . . why not 100 or 150?
What?
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,767


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #58 on: January 25, 2004, 12:35:18 PM »

Kinda stupid to take 106; then the percentages just get a little of . . . why not 100 or 150?
What?

It seems like he think you wrote 106 and not 1006 like you actually did.
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,584
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #59 on: January 25, 2004, 01:20:03 PM »

Kerry will easily win NH.  Over the next few weeks Lieberman and Dean fail to win anywhere and will both proably drop out.  This clears the way for Kerry, Edwards does well in the South and woudl be a good pick for VP

Dean will win in Michigan and Arizona I think.  That maybe enough to keep him in it.  Not to mention that Sharpton will start to pick-up votes in the south.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,767


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #60 on: January 25, 2004, 01:36:27 PM »

Kerry will easily win NH.  Over the next few weeks Lieberman and Dean fail to win anywhere and will both proably drop out.  This clears the way for Kerry, Edwards does well in the South and woudl be a good pick for VP

Dean will win in Michigan and Arizona I think.  That maybe enough to keep him in it.  Not to mention that Sharpton will start to pick-up votes in the south.

Yeah, of course he will win Arizona. Don't let the fact that he lost half his support there in one week and is currently in 3rd place there disturb that prediction.... Wink
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,584
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #61 on: January 25, 2004, 01:41:32 PM »

Kerry will easily win NH.  Over the next few weeks Lieberman and Dean fail to win anywhere and will both proably drop out.  This clears the way for Kerry, Edwards does well in the South and woudl be a good pick for VP

Dean will win in Michigan and Arizona I think.  That maybe enough to keep him in it.  Not to mention that Sharpton will start to pick-up votes in the south.

Yeah, of course he will win Arizona. Don't let the fact that he lost half his support there in one week and is currently in 3rd place there disturb that prediction.... Wink

I think that Dean will gain a bit more steam after New Hampshire.  Remember, Dean is the only candidate who has a 50 state organization in place and he has the most important thing: money.
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #62 on: January 25, 2004, 01:44:22 PM »

Hate to burst your bubble, but Dean's done.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,767


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #63 on: January 25, 2004, 01:46:23 PM »

Kerry will easily win NH.  Over the next few weeks Lieberman and Dean fail to win anywhere and will both proably drop out.  This clears the way for Kerry, Edwards does well in the South and woudl be a good pick for VP

Dean will win in Michigan and Arizona I think.  That maybe enough to keep him in it.  Not to mention that Sharpton will start to pick-up votes in the south.

Yeah, of course he will win Arizona. Don't let the fact that he lost half his support there in one week and is currently in 3rd place there disturb that prediction.... Wink

I think that Dean will gain a bit more steam after New Hampshire.  Remember, Dean is the only candidate who has a 50 state organization in place and he has the most important thing: money.

Why would Dean gain steam in New Hampshire, if he does badly he will just continue to fall.
Logged
jravnsbo
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,888


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #64 on: January 26, 2004, 03:31:03 PM »

a strong 2d would look like a win for Dean afte rthe beating he has taken in the press and early week polls.

Clark is the one in freefall.

Kerry will easily win NH.  Over the next few weeks Lieberman and Dean fail to win anywhere and will both proably drop out.  This clears the way for Kerry, Edwards does well in the South and woudl be a good pick for VP

Dean will win in Michigan and Arizona I think.  That maybe enough to keep him in it.  Not to mention that Sharpton will start to pick-up votes in the south.

Yeah, of course he will win Arizona. Don't let the fact that he lost half his support there in one week and is currently in 3rd place there disturb that prediction.... Wink

I think that Dean will gain a bit more steam after New Hampshire.  Remember, Dean is the only candidate who has a 50 state organization in place and he has the most important thing: money.

Why would Dean gain steam in New Hampshire, if he does badly he will just continue to fall.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,767


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #65 on: January 26, 2004, 03:32:44 PM »

Dean is already behind Kerry in all Feb 3rd states, if he finishes behind Kerry in New Hampshire, he wont gain on Kerry. Dean is looking really done for. I have trouble seeing anyone beating Kerry, the way things are going right now.

a strong 2d would look like a win for Dean afte rthe beating he has taken in the press and early week polls.

Clark is the one in freefall.

Kerry will easily win NH.  Over the next few weeks Lieberman and Dean fail to win anywhere and will both proably drop out.  This clears the way for Kerry, Edwards does well in the South and woudl be a good pick for VP

Dean will win in Michigan and Arizona I think.  That maybe enough to keep him in it.  Not to mention that Sharpton will start to pick-up votes in the south.

Yeah, of course he will win Arizona. Don't let the fact that he lost half his support there in one week and is currently in 3rd place there disturb that prediction.... Wink

I think that Dean will gain a bit more steam after New Hampshire.  Remember, Dean is the only candidate who has a 50 state organization in place and he has the most important thing: money.

Why would Dean gain steam in New Hampshire, if he does badly he will just continue to fall.
Logged
jravnsbo
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,888


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #66 on: January 26, 2004, 03:34:24 PM »

It will be interesting to see where they all go and campaign.  keryy has spent $0 on feb 3 states and is only doing well in AZ and SC.

It will take all the candidates a lot of money on Feb 3.  They say $2 million in Missouri.

Just hard for them all to campaign in 7 states ina week.


Dean is already behind Kerry in all Feb 3rd states, if he finishes behind Kerry in New Hampshire, he wont gain on Kerry. Dean is looking really done for. I have trouble seeing anyone beating Kerry, the way things are going right now.

a strong 2d would look like a win for Dean afte rthe beating he has taken in the press and early week polls.

Clark is the one in freefall.

Kerry will easily win NH.  Over the next few weeks Lieberman and Dean fail to win anywhere and will both proably drop out.  This clears the way for Kerry, Edwards does well in the South and woudl be a good pick for VP

Dean will win in Michigan and Arizona I think.  That maybe enough to keep him in it.  Not to mention that Sharpton will start to pick-up votes in the south.

Yeah, of course he will win Arizona. Don't let the fact that he lost half his support there in one week and is currently in 3rd place there disturb that prediction.... Wink

I think that Dean will gain a bit more steam after New Hampshire.  Remember, Dean is the only candidate who has a 50 state organization in place and he has the most important thing: money.

Why would Dean gain steam in New Hampshire, if he does badly he will just continue to fall.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 29,767


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #67 on: January 26, 2004, 03:36:00 PM »

Edwards has to win in SC, so he will focus there. He will be the only one who has something seriously at stake, Kerry will win effortlessly in a number of places after hw wins NH, and Dean and Clark will be pretty dead anyway.

It will be interesting to see where they all go and campaign.  keryy has spent $0 on feb 3 states and is only doing well in AZ and SC.

It will take all the candidates a lot of money on Feb 3.  They say $2 million in Missouri.

Just hard for them all to campaign in 7 states ina week.


Dean is already behind Kerry in all Feb 3rd states, if he finishes behind Kerry in New Hampshire, he wont gain on Kerry. Dean is looking really done for. I have trouble seeing anyone beating Kerry, the way things are going right now.

a strong 2d would look like a win for Dean afte rthe beating he has taken in the press and early week polls.

Clark is the one in freefall.

Kerry will easily win NH.  Over the next few weeks Lieberman and Dean fail to win anywhere and will both proably drop out.  This clears the way for Kerry, Edwards does well in the South and woudl be a good pick for VP

Dean will win in Michigan and Arizona I think.  That maybe enough to keep him in it.  Not to mention that Sharpton will start to pick-up votes in the south.

Yeah, of course he will win Arizona. Don't let the fact that he lost half his support there in one week and is currently in 3rd place there disturb that prediction.... Wink

I think that Dean will gain a bit more steam after New Hampshire.  Remember, Dean is the only candidate who has a 50 state organization in place and he has the most important thing: money.

Why would Dean gain steam in New Hampshire, if he does badly he will just continue to fall.
Logged
Huckleberry Finn
Finn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,819


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #68 on: January 26, 2004, 06:04:07 PM »

Edwards would be the best choice as vice president candidate for anybody else democratic nominee will be. But where we can find VP for Edwards himself?

I think that good VP should be younger than president. Lieberman was bad choice and Cheney is awful. (I think Cheney can really lessen Bush's possibility. He can maybe please some elder people, but among younger voters he can hurt Bush much. Also Cheney is ultra-conservative who doesn't make easier Bush's plan to pretend moderate conservative)

In case of young or youthful president candidate like Edwards it could be hard to find fit running mate.

What you would say senator Evan Bayh of Indiana? He is youthfull and moderate. But I'm not sure his "geographical profit". Edwards should probably have to fight for North Caroline. Winning in Indiana with Bayh wouldn't be easy also.
Logged
Michael Z
Mike
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 4,288
Political Matrix
E: -5.88, S: -4.72

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #69 on: January 26, 2004, 06:08:51 PM »
« Edited: January 26, 2004, 06:11:43 PM by Michael Zeigermann »

I think that good VP should be younger than president. Lieberman was bad choice and Cheney is awful. (I think Cheney can really lessen Bush's possibility. He can maybe please some elder people, but among younger voters he can hurt Bush much. Also Cheney is ultra-conservative who doesn't make easier Bush's plan to pretend moderate conservative)

Unfortunately I will have to disagree there. Cheney was an inspired choice for Bush in 2000, since Cheney's experience immediately cancelled out any perceived inexperience on GWB's behalf. (That said, I do agree with your description of Cheney as an ultra-conservative.)

Similarly, should Edwards win the nomination he is inevitably going to face charges of inexperience, and would therefore do well to choose someone older. My money's on Graham.
Logged
© tweed
Miamiu1027
Atlas Superstar
*****
Posts: 36,563
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #70 on: January 26, 2004, 06:44:06 PM »

Similarly, should Edwards win the nomination he is inevitably going to face charges of inexperience, and would therefore do well to choose someone older. My money's on Graham.
You think Edwards would choose another southerner? Maybe it is a good strategy...forcing the Republicans to pour money into LA, ARK, TN, NC, and FLA is big.
Logged
Huckleberry Finn
Finn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,819


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #71 on: January 26, 2004, 07:14:05 PM »

No No Graham! I remembered that he demanded to attack to Syria in last spring after Iraq War. He doesn't sound very smart person.
Logged
Huckleberry Finn
Finn
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,819


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #72 on: January 26, 2004, 07:17:13 PM »

But it was good point that there is need to experience about Edwards running mate.
Logged
jravnsbo
Jr. Member
***
Posts: 1,888


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #73 on: January 26, 2004, 09:45:13 PM »

Well I saw Grham int he last few days syaing he thought the WMDs were in Syria again.  Will be hard for Dems to argue about that with Graham saying their in Syria.

Evan Byah is up for reelection this year guys and so doubtful he would take VP, I see him running in 2008.


No No Graham! I remembered that he demanded to attack to Syria in last spring after Iraq War. He doesn't sound very smart person.
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
Atlas Star
*****
Posts: 20,584
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #74 on: January 26, 2004, 09:59:40 PM »

Well I saw Grham int he last few days syaing he thought the WMDs were in Syria again.  Will be hard for Dems to argue about that with Graham saying their in Syria.

Evan Byah is up for reelection this year guys and so doubtful he would take VP, I see him running in 2008.


No No Graham! I remembered that he demanded to attack to Syria in last spring after Iraq War. He doesn't sound very smart person.

The weapons are in the Bekaa Valley in Lebanon.  Anyway about Byah, do we really want another senator for Indiana as vice-president?  Did we learn ur lesson the first time?
Logged
Pages: 1 2 [3] 4 5  
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length

Terms of Service - DMCA Agent and Policy - Privacy Policy and Cookies

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

Page created in 0.063 seconds with 12 queries.