Hmmm....what if? (interesting)

[Starbucks Union Thug HokeyPuck]

What if the Democrats nominated a more moderate southern guy, and the republicans nominated a more liberal Northern guy.  Like Edwards vs. Guliani,  for example.  How would that play out?  Would the republican win the NE and the Dem win the South?  

[Gustaf]

The Democrat would carry moderate Southern states, such as TN, AR, LA whereas the Republican would carry NH, ME and possibly VT. Overall though, the Dems are stronger in the Northeast than the GOP is in the South. I'll make a map soon...

[bullmoose88]

The Republican would also improve his chances and likely carry PA, NJ (which has a history of voting for moderate republicans, especially those from the same region) and improve his share of the vote in NY and CT.

VT is a bit of a stretch nowadays

[Gustaf]

The Republican would also improve his chances and likely carry PA, NJ (which has a history of voting for moderate republicans, especially those from the same region) and improve his share of the vote in NY and CT.

VT is a bit of a stretch nowadays

Gore's victory margin:

NJ: 15.83%

VT: 9.94%

I agree with you on PA though.

[Gustaf]

Something along those lines?

[Filuwaúrdjan]

The Democrat would win NC, KY and GA... and would have a good chance of carrying SC and MS (yes MS. Look at 1996)

Depending on how populist the Democrat was... the Republican would win CT

[Gustaf]

The Democrat would win NC, KY and GA... and would have a good chance of carrying SC and MS (yes MS. Look at 1996)

Depending on how populist the Democrat was... the Republican would win CT

I think both nominees would have to keep somewhat in line...if Clinton came 5 points from wining MS in an elecion that he won by 14 poins a populaist won't win it in a close election.

[Platypus]

The Democrat would win FL, the Republican CT and probably OH

[Kodratos]

What if the Democrats nominated a more moderate southern guy, and the republicans nominated a more liberal Northern guy.  Like Edwards vs. Guliani,  for example.  How would that play out?  Would the republican win the NE and the Dem win the South?  

Edwards is not a moderate. He just presents himself that way.

[© tweed]

What if the Democrats nominated a more moderate southern guy, and the republicans nominated a more liberal Northern guy.  Like Edwards vs. Guliani,  for example.  How would that play out?  Would the republican win the NE and the Dem win the South?  

Edwards is not a moderate. He just presents himself that way.

Yes he is.

[Kodratos]

What if the Democrats nominated a more moderate southern guy, and the republicans nominated a more liberal Northern guy.  Like Edwards vs. Guliani,  for example.  How would that play out?  Would the republican win the NE and the Dem win the South?  

Edwards is not a moderate. He just presents himself that way.

Yes he is.

Maybe a moderate when put up next to John Kerry, but considering where the Democratic Party was 5 or 6 years ago, he is definately not a moderate. Anyone who votes NO on banning partial birth abortion is not a moderate.
Here is his rating by ontheissues.org

[© tweed]

What if the Democrats nominated a more moderate southern guy, and the republicans nominated a more liberal Northern guy.  Like Edwards vs. Guliani,  for example.  How would that play out?  Would the republican win the NE and the Dem win the South?  

Edwards is not a moderate. He just presents himself that way.

Yes he is.

Maybe a moderate when put up next to John Kerry, but considering where the Democratic Party was 5 or 6 years ago, he is definately not a moderate. Anyone who votes NO on banning partial birth abortion is not a moderate.
Here is his rating by ontheissues.org

That bill had no excpetion for the health of the mother.

[Kodratos]

There were two bills, he voted NO one, didn't show up for the other.  The latest vote was 64-33. Hardly a moderate stance he has there. Besides that's not the only very liberal stance he has. Look at that chart I posted. How is he a moderate, besides the fact he supports the Death Penalty

[opebo]

The answer here is that no one would be pleased.  Southerners wouldn't like either candidate, and northern liberals wouldn't like either candidate.  It would be a stupid strategy for both parties.

[A-Max]

The point is moot!  Moderates rarely survive the primaries.   I think Edwards  ranks in the top five liberals in Senate.

[??????????]

This is where I was at on that quiz.



Populist-Leaning Conservative.

[© tweed]

Here's what I got:



90% liberal, 25% libertarian.

[angus]

Here's what I got:



90% liberal, 25% libertarian.

Reality check:  you and I are close on the personal, but far apart on the economic:  I get 100%/80%.  Good thing we're in different political parties.  I've also noticed I'm a smidge to the right of statesrights too.  Now I'm feeling like a right-wing Republican.  "Drive on, jeeves."  I'd welcome a 'liberal' republican, as long as 'liberal' doesn't mean big-government spending.  (i.e., the incumbent)

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

Personal 39%
Economic 65%

[??????????]

I was like:

10% Social
80% Economic

Something very close to that. Boss Tweed and I are at completely opposite ends of the spectrum.

[they don't love you like i love you]

Edwards is waaaay further to the left than Giuliani is to the right. Poor example. Someone like John Breaux would be way better.

[they don't love you like i love you]

I got:



Personal: 72%
Economic: 10%

Populist-Leaning Liberal

[WalterMitty]

call me crazy, but i think guiliani would do well in the south.

[angus]

I think you're right.  I also think he'd do well in the West, which is even crazier.  Not too sure how he'd play in New England, though.  I wasn't kidding about him getting called all those nasty names by my leftist friends in Boston in the late 90s.

[Bleeding heart conservative, HTMLdon]

I concur.

That Guiliani would do well in the south, you're not crazy

call me crazy, but i think guiliani would do well in the south.