Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
Did you miss your activation email?
January 29, 2020, 09:09:00 am
News: 2020 Presidential Predictions (Primary) are now active.

  Atlas Forum
  Election Archive
  Election Archive
  2004 U.S. Presidential Election
  2004 User Predictions - Discussion
« previous next »
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 ... 99 Print
Author Topic: 2004 User Predictions - Discussion  (Read 823741 times)
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,585


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #500 on: January 07, 2004, 10:48:05 am »

The most left wing of the mainstream candidates is actually Edwards... he'd make a good Labour cabinet member.
"of the mainstream candidates"Huh Who are excluded, all actual left-wingers, or what?
Logged
jravnsbo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,888


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #501 on: January 07, 2004, 12:03:51 pm »

Yes if you are extrreme left or extreme right you are out of the mainstream.  Like kucinich, Dean, Sharpton and Braun way too far left.


The most left wing of the mainstream candidates is actually Edwards... he'd make a good Labour cabinet member.
"of the mainstream candidates"Huh Who are excluded, all actual left-wingers, or what?
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 62,884
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #502 on: January 07, 2004, 12:46:58 pm »

I was excluding Kuchinich, Braun and Sharpton.
Logged
opebo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 47,053


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #503 on: January 07, 2004, 02:13:05 pm »

The most left wing of the mainstream candidates is actually Edwards... he'd make a good Labour cabinet member.

I agree Realpolitik that Edwards is further left than he is percieved to be - and this goes to my point that people percieve candidates by their region more than their ideology.  Ideology can be hard to pin down, whereas a Southern accent automatically makes right wingers give you the benefit of the doubt, and left wingers view you with suspicion.  
Of course I see ALL Democrats as too left wing!
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,601
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #504 on: January 07, 2004, 02:16:47 pm »

The most left wing of the mainstream candidates is actually Edwards... he'd make a good Labour cabinet member.

Acctually, not so.  If you look at the political calculator, I don't believe its Edwards.  Also, Dean made a statement that he wanted to put government regulation into all industry, that pretty leftwing.  Also, the New Labour Party is acctually further to the right than the American Democrat Party on a lot of issues.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,585


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #505 on: January 07, 2004, 02:20:42 pm »

The most left wing of the mainstream candidates is actually Edwards... he'd make a good Labour cabinet member.

Acctually, not so.  If you look at the political calculator, I don't believe its Edwards.  Also, Dean made a statement that he wanted to put government regulation into all industry, that pretty leftwing.  Also, the New Labour Party is acctually further to the right than the American Democrat Party on a lot of issues.

Two points. Firstly, The political compass that we used on another thread placed all primary candidates on their chart.

Secondly, you have to make a difference between rhetoric and action, or perhaps rather direction and aim. The UK as a country is to the left of the US, so a party aiming to maintain the current situation in the UK would be to the left of a party favouring status quo in the US.
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,601
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #506 on: January 07, 2004, 02:24:32 pm »

The most left wing of the mainstream candidates is actually Edwards... he'd make a good Labour cabinet member.

Acctually, not so.  If you look at the political calculator, I don't believe its Edwards.  Also, Dean made a statement that he wanted to put government regulation into all industry, that pretty leftwing.  Also, the New Labour Party is acctually further to the right than the American Democrat Party on a lot of issues.

Two points. Firstly, The political compass that we used on another thread placed all primary candidates on their chart.

Secondly, you have to make a difference between rhetoric and action, or perhaps rather direction and aim. The UK as a country is to the left of the US, so a party aiming to maintain the current situation in the UK would be to the left of a party favouring status quo in the US.

But the Democrats are not the status quo.  They are anti-status quo and have been since FDR.
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,585


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #507 on: January 07, 2004, 02:25:43 pm »

The most left wing of the mainstream candidates is actually Edwards... he'd make a good Labour cabinet member.

Acctually, not so.  If you look at the political calculator, I don't believe its Edwards.  Also, Dean made a statement that he wanted to put government regulation into all industry, that pretty leftwing.  Also, the New Labour Party is acctually further to the right than the American Democrat Party on a lot of issues.

Two points. Firstly, The political compass that we used on another thread placed all primary candidates on their chart.

Secondly, you have to make a difference between rhetoric and action, or perhaps rather direction and aim. The UK as a country is to the left of the US, so a party aiming to maintain the current situation in the UK would be to the left of a party favouring status quo in the US.

But the Democrats are not the status quo.  They are anti-status quo and have been since FDR.

It was just an example.  
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,601
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #508 on: January 07, 2004, 02:26:47 pm »

The most left wing of the mainstream candidates is actually Edwards... he'd make a good Labour cabinet member.

Acctually, not so.  If you look at the political calculator, I don't believe its Edwards.  Also, Dean made a statement that he wanted to put government regulation into all industry, that pretty leftwing.  Also, the New Labour Party is acctually further to the right than the American Democrat Party on a lot of issues.

Two points. Firstly, The political compass that we used on another thread placed all primary candidates on their chart.

Secondly, you have to make a difference between rhetoric and action, or perhaps rather direction and aim. The UK as a country is to the left of the US, so a party aiming to maintain the current situation in the UK would be to the left of a party favouring status quo in the US.

But the Democrats are not the status quo.  They are anti-status quo and have been since FDR.

It was just an example.  

Of what?
Logged
Gustaf
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 29,585


Political Matrix
E: 0.39, S: -0.70

P
Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #509 on: January 07, 2004, 02:31:22 pm »

The most left wing of the mainstream candidates is actually Edwards... he'd make a good Labour cabinet member.

Acctually, not so.  If you look at the political calculator, I don't believe its Edwards.  Also, Dean made a statement that he wanted to put government regulation into all industry, that pretty leftwing.  Also, the New Labour Party is acctually further to the right than the American Democrat Party on a lot of issues.

Two points. Firstly, The political compass that we used on another thread placed all primary candidates on their chart.

Secondly, you have to make a difference between rhetoric and action, or perhaps rather direction and aim. The UK as a country is to the left of the US, so a party aiming to maintain the current situation in the UK would be to the left of a party favouring status quo in the US.

But the Democrats are not the status quo.  They are anti-status quo and have been since FDR.

It was just an example.  

Of what?

My point. Let's take an example. I don't remember the American tax level, so I'll use other countries. In the UK, the overall taxation is 37% of GDP. In Sweden it is 53% of GDP. If a British party advocated higher taxes and a Swedish party advocated lower taxes, the Swedish party might be viewed as further to the right. However, if the Swedish party wants to cut taxes to, say 50% of GDP, and the British party wants to raise them to 40% of GDP, the Swedish party is still favouring a more leftist society. All I was saying is that this should be kept in mind when these comparisons are made. Look at where you're headed, not just the direction.  
Logged
nonluddite
Newbie
*
Posts: 9


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #510 on: January 07, 2004, 09:35:27 pm »


But the Democrats are not the status quo.  They are anti-status quo and have been since FDR.

Yes, they're progressive, and have been since Bryan
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,601
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #511 on: January 08, 2004, 12:22:00 am »

The most left wing of the mainstream candidates is actually Edwards... he'd make a good Labour cabinet member.

Acctually, not so.  If you look at the political calculator, I don't believe its Edwards.  Also, Dean made a statement that he wanted to put government regulation into all industry, that pretty leftwing.  Also, the New Labour Party is acctually further to the right than the American Democrat Party on a lot of issues.

Two points. Firstly, The political compass that we used on another thread placed all primary candidates on their chart.

Secondly, you have to make a difference between rhetoric and action, or perhaps rather direction and aim. The UK as a country is to the left of the US, so a party aiming to maintain the current situation in the UK would be to the left of a party favouring status quo in the US.

But the Democrats are not the status quo.  They are anti-status quo and have been since FDR.

It was just an example.  

Of what?

My point. Let's take an example. I don't remember the American tax level, so I'll use other countries. In the UK, the overall taxation is 37% of GDP. In Sweden it is 53% of GDP. If a British party advocated higher taxes and a Swedish party advocated lower taxes, the Swedish party might be viewed as further to the right. However, if the Swedish party wants to cut taxes to, say 50% of GDP, and the British party wants to raise them to 40% of GDP, the Swedish party is still favouring a more leftist society. All I was saying is that this should be kept in mind when these comparisons are made. Look at where you're headed, not just the direction.  

I see what you are saying.  I guess that I am looking more at "immediatly" liberal than "overall" Liberal, if you know what I mean.
Logged
mossy
Jr. Member
**
Posts: 95


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #512 on: January 08, 2004, 12:57:41 am »

Great site, great game.

This is so hard.     Bush is not the same moderate candidate that ran in 2000----and then not knowing which Dem gets the nod.  But this is like having 4 variables.  Bush A, Bush B, Dean, Clark.

Making a list of gray states, I came up with 10, which includes my own.
MO, NV, NH, MI, SC, OH, WI, FL IA, OR.

This list presumes Clark with the nomination.
Logged
12th Doctor
supersoulty
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 20,601
Ukraine


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #513 on: January 08, 2004, 02:04:26 am »

I made a major change to my map when it comes to New York.  I have a hunch.
Logged
00tim
Rookie
*
Posts: 24


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #514 on: January 08, 2004, 12:13:57 pm »

Great site, great game.

This is so hard.     Bush is not the same moderate candidate that ran in 2000----and then not knowing which Dem gets the nod.  But this is like having 4 variables.  Bush A, Bush B, Dean, Clark.

Making a list of gray states, I came up with 10, which includes my own.
MO, NV, NH, MI, SC, OH, WI, FL IA, OR.

This list presumes Clark with the nomination.
I agree that if presuming that Clark is the nominee then there are more states in play than with Dean but I believe that Florida is off the list for any Dem this time around.
Logged
Filuwaúrdjan
Realpolitik
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 62,884
United Kingdom


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #515 on: January 08, 2004, 03:11:36 pm »

The New Labour Group was a shortlived political grouping formed by some former Labour councillers on Hackney LBC.

Labour are basically the "blue collar wing"(ie: economically centre left and socially moderate) of the Democratic party, and Edwards fits that quite well.

I don't see how New York can be a tossup though...
Logged
afleitch
Moderators
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 25,291


Political Matrix
E: 2.45, S: -8.17

Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #516 on: January 08, 2004, 07:28:08 pm »

There are indeed many wings of Labour, just are there are many different wings of the Democratic party (yes, even as wierd as LaRouche!) Labour and the Democrats fit neatly into the political spectrum as it exists today. Both parties 'exchange' representatives to shadow election campaigns, in fact Labour's Peter Mandelson is helping co-ordinate this years effort I believe. And I hope it is a success. Clinton advisors helped Labour get the right 'angle' for their spectacular 1997 campaign and this year they're returning the favour. It's just a shame that Tony Blair can't officially back the Democratic candidate, but I'm sure deep down he holds high opinions of Wesley Clark and other moderate Dems. The Neo-Cons can choke on that one!
Logged
jacob_101
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 647


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #517 on: January 08, 2004, 07:54:28 pm »

I agree somewhat with what you say about a candidate's region, and if Edwards were to get the nomination that could spell trouble in the South for Bush, especially since Bush seems to stray further to the center and away from the right wing with his policies.  I think Edwards is the most likeable and electable candidate of all the Democratic nominees.  But, does not look like he will get the nomination though.
Logged
jravnsbo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,888


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #518 on: January 08, 2004, 08:58:44 pm »

Edwards is dead int he water, if he was ever started.

He is trailing Bush in his home state of NC by a wide margin and would offer little to a ticket, let alone nominee.

I agree somewhat with what you say about a candidate's region, and if Edwards were to get the nomination that could spell trouble in the South for Bush, especially since Bush seems to stray further to the center and away from the right wing with his policies.  I think Edwards is the most likeable and electable candidate of all the Democratic nominees.  But, does not look like he will get the nomination though.
Logged
agcatter
agcat
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 3,742


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #519 on: January 08, 2004, 10:49:48 pm »

I don't believe Edwards could carry NC, let alone any of the rest of the South.
Logged
Mort from NewYawk
MortfromNewYawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 399


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #520 on: January 09, 2004, 09:54:53 am »

Edwards wouldn't need the South, but if he made Bush commit resources there that would be a strength for him. Like any Democrat, he simply needs a solid Northeast and Far West, combined with a good showing in the Great Lakes and Southwest.

I don't know if anyone agrees, but I'm beginning to sense the media souring on Dean this week. The New Republic endorsed Lieberman, and a number of NY Times articles have focused on Clark and Edwards, and on primary voters who are changing their minds about Dean. Perhaps the sharks are gathering now that his poll numbers are slipping in NH.
Logged
jravnsbo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 1,888


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #521 on: January 09, 2004, 10:12:34 am »

Dean is still way ahead in NH.  Clark has justy passed Kery but sutill is 20 pts behind Dean.

Don't you love how the news continues to make news?
Logged
Mort from NewYawk
MortfromNewYawk
Sr. Member
****
Posts: 399


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #522 on: January 09, 2004, 11:06:52 am »

Well, sure, lots of stories and analysis hatch in the political media, and if the mass media senses they have selling power they may pick up the ball.

Also, the campaigns themselves look to the political media for ideas and lines of attack.
Logged
opebo
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 47,053


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #523 on: January 09, 2004, 12:51:58 pm »

Edwards wouldn't need the South, but if he made Bush commit resources there that would be a strength for him. Like any Democrat, he simply needs a solid Northeast and Far West, combined with a good showing in the Great Lakes and Southwest.


I agree with agcat, Edwards couldn't carry North Carolina, much less any other Southern State.  Above you mention a 'good showing' in the Southwest and the Great Lakes.  I think the Great Lakes states that barely went for Gore in 2000 are not going to be any more or less likely to vote for Edwards than for some other Democrat.  

As for the good showing in the Southwest, I think that brings up an interesting point - many posted maps for a Democrat win include either Arizona, Colorado, or both.  This seems quite a stretch.   I'm the first to admit that New Mexico could easily go Democrat, but I doubt the other two will.  Does anyone have any information on why these two formerly very Republican states would change at this point?  Hispanics?  Surely it can't be escapees from California (I suspect those who flee CA are the Republicans from there).

Logged
tweed
Miamiu1027
YaBB God
*****
Posts: 36,597
United States


Show only this user's posts in this thread
« Reply #524 on: January 09, 2004, 01:41:10 pm »

Arizona-Went for Bush 51-45% despite Gore not campaigning there.  Likely Republican 2004 but not out of reach.

Colorado-Denver is liberal as hell, but the rest of the state is very conservative, so Republican for the near future.

New Mexico-Has gone Dem in recent Presidential Elections but drifting republican.  Will only go dem is Richardson is VP.
Logged
Pages: 1 ... 16 17 18 19 20 [21] 22 23 24 25 26 ... 99 Print 
« previous next »
Jump to:  


Login with username, password and session length
Logout

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

Powered by SMF 1.1.21 | SMF © 2015, Simple Machines

© Dave Leip's Atlas of U.S. Elections, LLC