It's Early Days But Clinton Has A Lock On The Dem Nomination

[Lincoln Republican]

It is becoming increasingly clear by now, even in these early days, that Hillary Clinton has a lock on the Democratic Presidential nomination.

Clinton is seen as intelligent, well spoken, experienced, well versed on the issues, has instant name and face recognition, and has celebrity status in her own right.

She is polling well.  She is well liked and admired by rank and file Democrats.

Barack Obama is not catching on.  The Democrats are not about to hand over their Presidential nomination to a Senator in his first term.  Frankly, the electorate, ultimately, would not hand over the Presidency to a Senator in his first term.  Obama is stalled, and has no momentum or traction, and is not likely to gain much. 

The John Edwards campaign is coming apart.  His rhetoric about inequality in America is becoming tiresome to the public.  He spends hundreds of dollars on personal grooming, lives in an $8,000,000 house, and the public is increasingly wondering how he could possibly relate to the poor.  Edwards is faltering and will continue to do so.

Al Gore will not be running.  He would be starting from too far behind, and he realizes that.  He does not want to become involved in a losing candidacy.     

Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, and Christopher Dodd are minor candidates with limited support, limited money, and will have little impact on the outcome.  Their campaigns for the nomination will go newhere.

Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel are more or less nuisance candidates.

Thoughts?

[Alcon]

It is becoming increasingly clear by now, even in these early days, that Hillary Clinton has a lock on the Democratic Presidential nomination.

I disagree...

Clinton is seen as intelligent, well spoken, experienced, well versed on the issues, has instant name and face recognition, and has celebrity status in her own right.

Agreed, there.

She is polling well.  She is well liked and admired by rank and file Democrats.

She is polling well, but not great.  Here's a secret: most mainstraem Democrats are well-liked and admired by rank-and-file Democrats.  Primary voters, unless they have a litmus test issue, tend to be pumped about anyone they think may be the eventual nominee.  Most liked John Kerry well too.

Barack Obama is not catching on.  The Democrats are not about to hand over their Presidential nomination to a Senator in his first term.  Frankly, the electorate, ultimately, would not hand over the Presidency to a Senator in his first term.  Obama is stalled, and has no momentum or traction, and is not likely to gain much.

It's really too early to concern ourselves with momentum all that much.  But I disagree that the electorate will refuse to elect Obama on the basis of him being a first-term senator.  They elected George W. Bush, a politician who came from a similarly nothing background.  One-line attacks rarely work alone.  Obama is solid elsewhere, and the Republican will probably face a problem at least of equal force to Obama's lack of experience -- being a Republican in 2008.

The John Edwards campaign is coming apart.  His rhetoric about inequality in America is becoming tiresome to the public.  He spends hundreds of dollars on personal grooming, lives in an $8,000,000 house, and the public is increasingly wondering how he could possibly relate to the poor.  Edwards is faltering and will continue to do so.

As much as the public does love a good soundbite, and as much as I doubt he will get the nod, what exactly does the U.S. expect from their politicians at this point?  Bush ain't no rural rancher.

Al Gore will not be running.  He would be starting from too far behind, and he realizes that.  He does not want to become involved in a losing candidacy.

No major disagreement.

Bill Richardson, Joe Biden, and Christopher Dodd are minor candidates with limited support, limited money, and will have little impact on the outcome.  Their campaigns for the nomination will go newhere.

I think Richardson deserves to be separated from Biden and Dodd, but I fundamentally agree.

Dennis Kucinich and Mike Gravel are more or less nuisance candidates.

Agreed.

[Gabu]

Given that the primaries are over half a year away, I might bring your attention to predictions that other people made this far out before the 2006 elections.  There is no such thing as a "lock" in politics.

[Lincoln Republican]

Given that the primaries are over half a year away, I might bring your attention to predictions that other people made this far out before the 2006 elections.  There is no such thing as a "lock" in politics.

That may be true, and you make a very valid point, however, I have a strong feeling that this Democratic race is different from any in history.  I believe it will be over before too long into the process.

[Eleden]

Given that the primaries are over half a year away, I might bring your attention to predictions that other people made this far out before the 2006 elections.  There is no such thing as a "lock" in politics.

That may be true, and you make a very valid point, however, I have a strong feeling that this Democratic race is different from any in history.  I believe it will be over before too long into the process.

Perhaps, however if you look at history the Democratic frontrunner this early out rarely wins... unless of course he's the sitting VP.

[bonncaruso]

That may be true, and you make a very valid point, however, I have a strong feeling that this Democratic race is different from any in history.  I believe it will be over before too long into the process.
[/quote]

Indeed. The groundswell for a blue revoloution has just begun. I predict the biggest landslide since 1964.

[Eleden]

Not with Hillary as the nominee.

[Lincoln Republican]

That may be true, and you make a very valid point, however, I have a strong feeling that this Democratic race is different from any in history.  I believe it will be over before too long into the process.

Indeed. The groundswell for a blue revoloution has just begun. I predict the biggest landslide since 1964.
[/quote]

Thank you for your comment, and welcome to the forum.

[Trilobyte]

In the summer of 2003, Howard Dean was only beginning his surge to the front of the pack. We are seeing the same kind of hype right now with Obama and his fundraising. Obama's momentum is quietly building like Dean's and he will surge once he pours money into massive advertising.

If Obama fails to break out by the end of the third quarter, then I'd agree Clinton has the nomination locked up. But until then Clinton has to look out for that Dean-like surge because she can't count on Obama to blow it in the end like Dean did.

[Mr. Morden]

Given that the primaries are over half a year away, I might bring your attention to predictions that other people made this far out before the 2006 elections.  There is no such thing as a "lock" in politics.

That may be true, and you make a very valid point, however, I have a strong feeling that this Democratic race is different from any in history.  I believe it will be over before too long into the process.

You should read my generic predictions:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=54364.0

During every single election cycle, there are people who make bold predictions, and then when critics point out past elections when everyone's predictions turned out wrong, the predictor will respond by saying "Yeah, but this time is different."  Every single time, there are people who say that.  But the incorrect predictions keep on coming.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

[Lincoln Republican]

Given that the primaries are over half a year away, I might bring your attention to predictions that other people made this far out before the 2006 elections.  There is no such thing as a "lock" in politics.

That may be true, and you make a very valid point, however, I have a strong feeling that this Democratic race is different from any in history.  I believe it will be over before too long into the process.

You should read my generic predictions:

https://uselectionatlas.org/FORUM/index.php?topic=54364.0

During every single election cycle, there are people who make bold predictions, and then when critics point out past elections when everyone's predictions turned out wrong, the predictor will respond by saying "Yeah, but this time is different."  Every single time, there are people who say that.  But the incorrect predictions keep on coming.

Thank you.  Excellent post.

My prediction is that Hillary Clinton will wrap up the nomination early on in the process.  I believe circumstances for the Democrats in 2008 are quite unique from previous campaigns.  If I am wrong, I will simply say I was wrong, clear and simple, no ifs, ands, or buts, no excuses.

Of course incorrect predictions will keep on coming.  There is nothing wrong in making predictions, at whatever stage, as long as the one making the prediction is willing to accept responsibility for their own incorrect prediction, if it is incorrect, without making any excuses.

[Person Man]

I will say this much- Democratic campaigns are taking on the look and feel of Republican campaings and vice versa. 

Democrats have become well-funded and unified while the GOP has become divided and poorly funded. Like I said, if the democrats don't pull it off (even with Hillary(If divisivie W can do it, so can Hillary-just be perpared for the obnoxious complaining afterwards)), I would not see how the Democratic Party would be justified anymore.

[Nym90]

Clinton is certainly the frontrunner, but the race is far from over. There's still a long ways to go.

I agree, though, that Clinton has the combination of money and experience that no other candidate has. She's well-spoken and articulate, and relatively moderate on most issues.

I still think that Edwards and Richardson would both be stronger candidates (and probably better Presidents), and Obama certainly will put up a strong fight, but in the end Clinton will likely win the nomination unless she does or says something stupid.

[Person Man]

Although at this point, it is probably time for the dems to unite while the GOP have their divisive primary.

[Eraserhead]

Clinton does not have a lock. I still think Obama will win in the end.

[Eraserhead]

Clinton does not have a lock. I still think Obama will win in the end.

and you call ME a crazy optimist...

Well I wasn't the guy going around saying Rick Perry was going to lose and that the MS Senate race would be competetive.

[senor]

Hello!

What makes me (a little) angry is that the press and the media have already crowned front runners in this race, and the race is 6 months away.

Why Hillary? Why not Biden or Dodd? I like Joe Biden and honestly would think he would make a fine President. He seems to be highly intellegent and knowledgable, has tons of experience, and seems to me to be a genuine, decent person. Dodd also seems to be a good candidate.

Edwards is too liberal! Poverty cannot be changed, and all I hear from him is the government can do this, and the government can do that nonsense. He wants to create another Great Society, not realizing that the original one has fallen on his own weight. Edwards was a one term ex senator because the people of his state would not re-elect him. I don't fault him on his money, he did grow up poor, went to redneck schools and made what he made of himself. But I don't trust the judgement of a man who pays $400 bucks for a $20 Supercuts.

Kucinich has wanted to be President since he was a kid. Not happening. I would love to see him become a U.S. Senator. He's actually a good spokesman for the left. He is always happy and optimistic. Unfortunately he looks like a horse jocky.

I don't understand why Gravel is in the race, but he's a lot of fun nonetheless.

[motomonkey]

A "lock?"  I think not.  We are SOOO early.  We haven't had a scandal (Hart, Clinton), we haven't had a self-destructive meltdown (Dean), we haven't had tears (Muskie), we haven't had a huge unexpected drop out (Johnson), we haven't had an assassination or even an attempt (Kennedy). 

If you really look at  history, it is difficult to think that anything is locked this early.  Add to that we are a polarzied nation, we have a really serious African American and woman leading the race and we are at war!   

Get some popcorn, it's gonna be a show!

[Person Man]

...we've had an assisantation attempt.

[Gabu]

...we've had an assisantation attempt.

In the 2008 race?

[Person Man]

I think there was one in January on Hillary. There was a whole thing on Obama getting secret service.

[Gustaf]

Clinton does not have a lock. I still think Obama will win in the end.

and you call ME a crazy optimist...

Well I wasn't the guy going around saying Rick Perry was going to lose and that the MS Senate race would be competetive.

I never really said/thought that Rick Perry would lose.  I realize that I had TX red on my prediction map, so I don't really have a leg to stand on, but I never truly thought that Chris Bell would win.  It did think it was possible, but only a longshot.
However, in the early days of the race, I was adamant that Perry would come in second, while most people on the forum thought he would come in fourth, and in the single digits.  So I actually nailed the TX race better than most people.

As for MS...<shrugs>  I guess I just convinced myself that maybe Fleming could make a run for it.  Fleming could've broken 40%, if he had, ya know, positive cash on hand at any point during the race.

Who said that? I know I didn't and I can't remember anyone else predicting it either (besides maybe Vlad, but he was also a crazy optimist).

I still hold Hillary as the favourite but with the money race more or less even Obama is definitely in the race. Edwards has a sliver of a chance, but it all hinges on him winning Iowa. If he can pull that off he's in the race, otherwise he's dead.

[gogmagog]

I have to say somthing, And i know i'm not objective:

I feel like at first Clinton was the frontrunner becouse of name recognision but now she is simply consider to be, by most voters, as the best and strongest nominee.

She is much better in political games than her rivels and she already fought and won the right propoganda machine so i don't think she is going to make huge mistakes till 1/08.

So how and why Obama could win?

[Person Man]

Unless she pursues Obama into the marsh and is not heard from again, like many frontrunners usually do. It's either Edwards or Clinton. Obama seems to be weak and though I really like Richardson, don't think he could do it.