Welcome, Guest. Please login or register. Did you miss your activation email?
Pages: [1]   Go Down

AuthorTopic: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread  (Read 2597 times)

0 Members and 2 Guests are viewing this topic.
Please post once and this message will disappear! Introduce yourself, say hello, jump into a discussion...

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« on: March 08, 2007, 03:45:48 AM »
Ok.. it has started early this time.. let's use this to discuss the candidates.
Here is a news item that surprised me..I thought Guiliani and McCain would be closer. Guess, even the Republicans are moving to the center (which is good news)
--
Giuliani Leads McCain in Race For the Republican Nomination
Americans Are Already Paying Close Attention To the 2008 Election
By JOHN HARWOOD
March 7, 2007 9:59 p.m.

WASHINGTON -- Americans are already paying close attention to the 2008 presidential race, and they are giving new traction to one rising star in each party.

A new Wall Street Journal/NBC News poll1 shows that among Republicans, former New York City Mayor Rudy Giuliani has climbed into a solid lead for his party's nomination for the White House. Boasting support across his party's ideological spectrum, Mr. Giuliani leads Arizona Sen. John McCain by 55% to 34% in a head to head match of the two top Republican candidates.

Among Democrats, the poll shows, Barack Obama continues his improbable rising in the White House race after just two years as a U.S. senator from Illinois. Mr. Obama trails Democratic front-runner Hillary Clinton by a relatively narrow 47% to 39% in a match between two candidates who could make history. Mrs. Clinton, a New York senator and former First Lady, could become America's first woman president; Mr. Obama could become the first African-American president.

The telephone poll of 1,007 adults, conducted March 2-5 by Democratic pollster Peter Hart and Republican pollster Neil Newhouse, carries a margin of error of 3.1 percentage points.

America's difficulties with President Bush's war on terrorism appear to be influencing the shape of the early competition. Mr. Obama was an early opponent of the Iraq war, while Mrs. Clinton voted to authorize the conflict and refused to call her vote a mistake. Mr. McCain has staunchly backed Mr. Bush's Iraq policy, including the administration's current plans to add U.S. troops; Mr. Giuliani has praised Mr. Bush's persistence in the prosecuting the war but has been out of public office throughout its duration.

Americans' mood about the conflict hasn't improved since Mr. Bush announced his new policy of sending another 21,500 troops to improve security in Baghdad and the rest of the country. Just 20% of respondents characterize themselves as "more confident" the war will conclude successfully, while 69% say "less confident"; that's essentially unchanged since January.

Nor are Americans feeling positive about the war against al Qaeda and the Taliban in Afghanistan. Just 28% say that conflict is going well, while 69% say it isn't.

Among the poll's more striking findings is the high level of public interest fully 20 months before Election Day. About three in four Americans say they are following the campaign "fairly" or "very" closely; that's not far below the proportion that reported paying close attention to the president race in October 2000 -- one month before the election.

Write to John Harwood at john.harwood@wsj.com5
« Last Edit: July 01, 2007, 09:16:43 PM by losingnow »
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

pieterSAN

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,429
  • Money: 182991.00
  • Helwe
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread (Mods move after 2 days to ETC)
« Reply #1 on: March 08, 2007, 04:22:09 AM »
Kind of off-topic but The Audacity Of Hope by Obama is a good read.You get a good idea of where he wants to go.
« Last Edit: March 08, 2007, 04:24:13 AM by pieterSAN »
Logged
"...that is me offering you an olive basket... ...and that is you spitting in my face."

Scott Caan as Turk Malloy

feverpitch

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,328
  • Money: 894609.00
  • Lachchha Porotta drops a dung cake
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread (Mods move after 2 days to ETC)
« Reply #2 on: March 08, 2007, 05:03:34 AM »
With Obama the Republican strategy seems to have misfired so far. The more they have dug up his family history, including stories about slave ownership etc, the more his votebank has gone up. Guess the GOP has finall lost touch with the reality they have themselves helped create! :)
Logged
"In societies where modern conditions of production prevail, all life presents as an immense accumulation of spectacles. Everything that was directly lived has moved away into a representation."

Guy Debord, The Society of the Spectacle

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread (Mods move after 2 days to ETC)
« Reply #3 on: March 08, 2007, 08:43:29 AM »
GOP is in trouble. That is true.

As discussed during one of the cricket chats.. irrespective of his merits (I think he has a few) Obama will more than likely flatter to deceive. The South of the US is almost as backwards (in thinking and mindset) as any underdeveloped country. Unfortunately, race and religion play a huge role in the decision-making in the bible belt. Just imagine .. a Billy Bob from Georgia voting for a  black guy with Hussein as the middle name (and make no mistakes about it,  the GOP will carpet bomb the name Barack Hussein Obama - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_obama - during the campaign!!).   
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

sudzz

  • Marketing Moderator
  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,004
  • Money: 405718.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread (Mods move after 2 days to ETC)
« Reply #4 on: March 08, 2007, 08:52:59 AM »
GOP is in trouble. That is true.

As discussed during one of the cricket chats.. irrespective of his merits (I think he has a few) Obama will more than likely flatter to deceive. The South of the US is almost as backwards (in thinking and mindset) as any underdeveloped country. Unfortunately, race and religion play a huge role in the decision-making in the bible belt. Just imagine .. a Billy Bob from Georgia voting for a  black guy with Hussein as the middle name (and make no mistakes about it,  the GOP will carpet bomb the name Barack Hussein Obama - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_obama - during the campaign!!).   


As an outsider to you guys who are probably inside outsiders (I mean for all the strides the Indian American community makes it still constitutes a fringe as far as main stream politics is concerned) do you think the US is ready for a non white president at all? I mean will they let it happen?

The woman president....well in my books the woman running for the seat is not really a woman...but then again when did my opinion count in the first place.
Logged

pieterSAN

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,429
  • Money: 182991.00
  • Helwe
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread (Mods move after 2 days to ETC)
« Reply #5 on: March 08, 2007, 09:28:57 AM »
GOP is in trouble. That is true.

As discussed during one of the cricket chats.. irrespective of his merits (I think he has a few) Obama will more than likely flatter to deceive. The South of the US is almost as backwards (in thinking and mindset) as any underdeveloped country. Unfortunately, race and religion play a huge role in the decision-making in the bible belt. Just imagine .. a Billy Bob from Georgia voting for a  black guy with Hussein as the middle name (and make no mistakes about it,  the GOP will carpet bomb the name Barack Hussein Obama - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_obama - during the campaign!!).   


As an outsider to you guys who are probably inside outsiders (I mean for all the strides the Indian American community makes it still constitutes a fringe as far as main stream politics is concerned) do you think the US is ready for a non white president at all? I mean will they let it happen?

The woman president....well in my books the woman running for the seat is not really a woman...but then again when did my opinion count in the first place.


This is a difficult question to answer in the context of Obama.

For starters Obama is half-white and many people know it. There are many that don't care about race here. But of the people that do, some people may resent that. Some may actually like it. People that have racial prejudices (not just white people mind you) will repsond to it in different ways. I am not sure whether it helps him on the whole.

There is a strong perception that he believes in big government and this will be repeatedly blasted by Republicans and quite a few Democrats. This can be a problem too.

Personally, I think if Obama runs with Wes Clark then he has a good shot.
Logged
"...that is me offering you an olive basket... ...and that is you spitting in my face."

Scott Caan as Turk Malloy

sudzz

  • Marketing Moderator
  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 4,004
  • Money: 405718.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread (Mods move after 2 days to ETC)
« Reply #6 on: March 08, 2007, 10:06:10 AM »
GOP is in trouble. That is true.

As discussed during one of the cricket chats.. irrespective of his merits (I think he has a few) Obama will more than likely flatter to deceive. The South of the US is almost as backwards (in thinking and mindset) as any underdeveloped country. Unfortunately, race and religion play a huge role in the decision-making in the bible belt. Just imagine .. a Billy Bob from Georgia voting for a  black guy with Hussein as the middle name (and make no mistakes about it,  the GOP will carpet bomb the name Barack Hussein Obama - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_obama - during the campaign!!).   


As an outsider to you guys who are probably inside outsiders (I mean for all the strides the Indian American community makes it still constitutes a fringe as far as main stream politics is concerned) do you think the US is ready for a non white president at all? I mean will they let it happen?

The woman president....well in my books the woman running for the seat is not really a woman...but then again when did my opinion count in the first place.


This is a difficult question to answer in the context of Obama.

For starters Obama is half-white and many people know it. There are many that don't care about race here. But of the people that do, some people may resent that. Some may actually like it. People that have racial prejudices (not just white people mind you) will repsond to it in different ways. I am not sure whether it helps him on the whole.

There is a strong perception that he believes in big government and this will be repeatedly blasted by Republicans and quite a few Democrats. This can be a problem too.

Personally, I think if Obama runs with Wes Clark then he has a good shot.


I dont know how the anti incumbency factor will work in the US but from a purely Indo centric perspective Democrats have traditionally been bad for India and I dont know about Obama's policies but Mrs Clinton is avowedly anti Indian therefore I would be hoping that this guy gets a good shot and maybe a pro Indian Rep. candidate wins... ;D
Logged

pieterSAN

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,429
  • Money: 182991.00
  • Helwe
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread (Mods move after 2 days to ETC)
« Reply #7 on: March 08, 2007, 10:27:49 AM »
GOP is in trouble. That is true.

As discussed during one of the cricket chats.. irrespective of his merits (I think he has a few) Obama will more than likely flatter to deceive. The South of the US is almost as backwards (in thinking and mindset) as any underdeveloped country. Unfortunately, race and religion play a huge role in the decision-making in the bible belt. Just imagine .. a Billy Bob from Georgia voting for a  black guy with Hussein as the middle name (and make no mistakes about it,  the GOP will carpet bomb the name Barack Hussein Obama - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Barack_obama - during the campaign!!).   


As an outsider to you guys who are probably inside outsiders (I mean for all the strides the Indian American community makes it still constitutes a fringe as far as main stream politics is concerned) do you think the US is ready for a non white president at all? I mean will they let it happen?

The woman president....well in my books the woman running for the seat is not really a woman...but then again when did my opinion count in the first place.


This is a difficult question to answer in the context of Obama.

For starters Obama is half-white and many people know it. There are many that don't care about race here. But of the people that do, some people may resent that. Some may actually like it. People that have racial prejudices (not just white people mind you) will repsond to it in different ways. I am not sure whether it helps him on the whole.

There is a strong perception that he believes in big government and this will be repeatedly blasted by Republicans and quite a few Democrats. This can be a problem too.

Personally, I think if Obama runs with Wes Clark then he has a good shot.


I dont know how the anti incumbency factor will work in the US but from a purely Indo centric perspective Democrats have traditionally been bad for India and I dont know about Obama's policies but Mrs Clinton is avowedly anti Indian therefore I would be hoping that this guy gets a good shot and maybe a pro Indian Rep. candidate wins... ;D


This was what I was thinking when I was in favor of Bush in 2000. I feel that it is in everybody's interest if someone tries to bring people together and work together like Obama wants to. He appears to have integrity and he is very persuasive. I hope he is for real. As far as supporting India, I don't think we will get a friendlier government than the Bush one.

In any case, I still think Obama is long shot.
Logged
"...that is me offering you an olive basket... ...and that is you spitting in my face."

Scott Caan as Turk Malloy

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread (Mods move after 2 days to ETC)
« Reply #8 on: March 22, 2007, 09:13:54 PM »
Bravo, John Edwards. Way to go...very commendable!

--
Edwards Continues '08 Presidential Run

CHAPEL HILL, N.C. — Democrat John Edwards is forging ahead with his second bid for the presidency despite the sobering news that his wife, Elizabeth, is battling an incurable reappearance of cancer.

The presidential candidate revealed the closely guarded prognosis _ even family friends and some senior campaign staff were unaware _ at a news conference Thursday, his wife by his side in the hotel garden where they held their wedding reception 30 years ago.

Putting to rest speculation about his political future, Edwards told reporters: "The campaign goes on. The campaign goes on strongly."

The recurrence of the cancer _ this time on Elizabeth Edwards' bone _ presents a setback for the couple, both personally and politically. Elizabeth Edwards' illness and treatment is certain to affect her husband's presence in the early voting states and may raise questions about the viability of his campaign, especially with financial backers. The first fundraising deadline is fast approaching on March 31.

But both said the cancer was treatable and that they would stick with their plans to campaign vigorously for the nomination.

"From our perspective, there was no reason to stop," Edwards said. "I don't think we seriously thought about it."

Her health problems already have impacted the campaign. Edwards had canceled a Tuesday evening house party in Iowa to go with his wife to a doctor's appointment. His campaign had described it as a follow-up to a routine test she had Monday.

Faced with questions about how his wife's illness will affect the campaign, Edwards said he will pursue the presidency, but: "Any time, any place I need to be with Elizabeth I will be there _ period."

Mrs. Edwards, 57, was first diagnosed with cancer in the final weeks of the 2004 campaign. The day after Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry and Edwards, his running mate, conceded the election to George W. Bush, Edwards announced that his wife had invasive ductal cancer, the most common type of breast cancer, and would undergo treatment.

Mrs. Edwards underwent several months of radiation and chemotherapy for the lump in her breast. Her husband's campaign has said she had recovered from the illness.

"I don't look sickly, I don't feel sickly. I am as ready as any person can be for that," she said at the news conference.

John Edwards said a biopsy of her rib had showed that the cancer had returned. A broken rib prompted the closer examination.

Elizabeth Edwards said she injured her back trying to move a heavy chest in her home. When her husband came home, he gave her a hug that hurt and as she twisted out of his grip, she said she heard a pop. The broken rib is on her left side while the rib where the cancer was detected is on the right.

The bone is one of the most common places where breast cancer spreads, and once it does so it is not considered curable.

But how long women survive depends on how widespread the cancer is in the bone, and many can survive for years. The longer it takes for cancer to spread after the initial tumor, the better the prognosis. She was diagnosed in 2004.

Chemotherapy and radiation are standard treatments, along with use of drugs that specifically target the bones called bisphosphonates. Other treatments include hormone therapy if the cancer is responsive to estrogen.

"I will have what will be a less debilitating kind of chemotherapy ... for the rest of my life," Elizabeth Edwards said.

Dr. Lisa Carey, Elizabeth Edwards' physician, said that initial tests showed some very small suspicious spots elsewhere, but that the therapy focus would be on the bone. Asked where else, she said "possibly involving the lung."

Carey spoke to reporters following the Edwardses news conference.

The couple, married 30 years, have a grown daughter, Cate, and two young children, Emma Claire and Jack. Their teenage son, Wade, died in 1996 when high winds swept his Jeep off a North Carolina highway.

"We've been confronted with these kind of traumas and struggles already in our life," Edwards said. "When this happens you have a choice _ you can go and cower in the corner or you can go out there and be tough."

Elizabeth Edwards added: "We're always going to look for the silver lining _ it's who we are as people."

The news about the cancer's return and the decision to keep the campaign going was a closely held secret, with family friends and senior campaign advisers unaware of the diagnosis until the Edwardses news conference.

John Moylan, a senior adviser who runs Edwards' campaign in South Carolina, said he learned the news by watching it on television.

"This was a very private decision about a very private matter," the attorney from Columbia, S.C., said. "It was the best way to handle it."

Edwards is running in the top tier of Democratic presidential candidates. Polls show Sens. Hillary Rodham Clinton and Barack Obama ahead of him, but he is making a strong showing in Iowa, site of the nation's first presidential caucus. To emphasize his commitment to the race, Edwards said he was leaving North Carolina to go to New York, Boston and later California _ all big fundraising locales.

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, a rival for the nomination, said he and his wife offered their prayers, and in a telephone call to The Associated Press, added: "If there is one message here, it should be that we should all redouble our efforts to lick that deadly disease."

Another rival, Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, also said Edwards was in her prayers.

"I admire her optimism and strength in the face of adversity, and I look forward to seeing them both on the campaign trail," Clinton said in a statement.

At the White House, press secretary Tony Snow said "our prayers are with you."

"As somebody who has been through this, Elizabeth Edwards is setting a powerful example for a lot of people _ and good and positive one," said Snow, who had his colon removed in 2005 and underwent six months of chemotherapy after being diagnosed with colon cancer.
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

RicePlateReddy

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,728
  • Money: 947879.00
  • Chamat song
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread (Mods move after 2 days to ETC)
« Reply #9 on: March 22, 2007, 09:39:01 PM »
Bravo, John Edwards. Way to go...very commendable!

I liked this guy from the moment I saw him last primaries, and I like his stand on most of the issues.

I liked the reason why he joined politics (after he lost his son and decided the millions he had amassed meant nothing).

I like the fact that he became a very successful and sought after trial lawyer from very humble beginnings without a god father (father was a mill worker, mom a postal employee).

The only thing I didn't like was his co-sponsoring the Iraq war resolution with the fraud Liebermann (though his OpEd severely regretting it and calling it what it is -- genocide, was a little atonement).

I like the personality of his wife too -- a real pity her life is quickly winding down. Sadly, he may not have much of a chance with Bilahari and Osama.

Logged
I balance, I weave, I dodge, I frolic, and my bills are all paid. On weekends, to let off steam, I participate in full-contact origami. Years ago I discovered the meaning of life but forgot to write it down. - (thanks, Hugh Gallagher)

RicePlateReddy

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 5,728
  • Money: 947879.00
  • Chamat song
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread (Mods move after 2 days to ETC)
« Reply #10 on: March 22, 2007, 09:46:06 PM »
I dont know how the anti incumbency factor will work in the US but from a purely Indo centric perspective Democrats have traditionally been bad for India and I dont know about Obama's policies but Mrs Clinton is avowedly anti Indian therefore I would be hoping that this guy gets a good shot and maybe a pro Indian Rep. candidate wins... ;D

The anti Indian does not hold up. None of the US politicians can afford to be really anti Indian in terms of the business exchanges -- India is too entrenched in US corporate life now, and all for the good of both sides.

This nuclear thing with India -- it was all about getting mega bucks for US nuclear supplies companies from the US standpoint and avoid India picking energy from places the US does not control. Nothing to do with nuclear weapons.

The Bush govt as well as any dem govt will continue to sell weapon systems and aircraft to Pakistan, both for money from there and for increasing India's appetite for the same. This is driven across political ideologies, and this moral less cash flow business sustains such a major segment of the US economy. Whenever the press quotes the outsourcing and BPO revenue, please compare to the Indian defence budget and the weapon and technology import outlay to get perspective of what the numbers mean.

« Last Edit: March 22, 2007, 09:48:03 PM by kingofprussia »
Logged
I balance, I weave, I dodge, I frolic, and my bills are all paid. On weekends, to let off steam, I participate in full-contact origami. Years ago I discovered the meaning of life but forgot to write it down. - (thanks, Hugh Gallagher)

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread (Mods move after 2 days to ETC)
« Reply #11 on: July 01, 2007, 09:15:21 PM »
Barack Obama Raises Record $32.5 Million

JIM KUHNHENN | July 1, 2007 04:59 PM EST | AP

WASHINGTON — Sen. Barack Obama reported Sunday raising at least $32.5 million for his presidential campaign from April through June, a record for a Democratic candidate.

That is about $5 million more than what Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, Obama's main Democratic rival, has said she would raise for the reporting period that ended Saturday.

At least $31 million of Obama's total is for party primaries, according to campaign aides. That figure could further distance Obama from Clinton, whose fundraising has included significant sums of money eligible only for the general election.

The first-term senator from Illinois received donations from more than 154,000 individual contributors and through the first half of the year had 258,000 donors, an extraordinary figure at this stage of the campaign. Obama raised $25.7 million in the first three months of the year.

"Together, we have built the largest grass-roots campaign in history for this stage of a presidential race," Obama said in a statement Sunday. "That's the kind of movement that can change the special interest-driven politics in Washington and transform our country. And it's just the beginning."

Meanwhile, Democrat John Edwards raised more than $9 million from April through June and relied on nearly 100,000 donors during the first half of the year.

The fundraising total met the campaign's stated goal but was about $5 million less than what he took in during the first three months of the year. The campaign has said it is on track to raise $40 million by the Iowa caucuses in January.

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson was at Edward's heels, with his campaign reporting more than $7 million raised. But Edwards' six-month total was $23 million, compared with more than $13 million for Richardson.

"Democrats are clearly engaging the public and expanding the donor base," Edwards deputy campaign manager Jonathan Prince said Sunday in reaction to Obama's fundraising.

He said the aim of the Edwards campaign was to attract more contributors by holding more small donor events to build a grass-roots network. "We feel we are exactly where we need to be," Edwards adviser Joe Trippi said. "This is not a money race, it's a race to win the nomination."

Sen. Christopher Dodd, D-Conn., on Sunday reported raising $3.25 million in the quarter for his presidential campaign, bringing his total raised this year to $7.3 million. Dodd last quarter also transferred $4.7 million from his Senate campaign account. His campaign said he had $6.5 million cash on hand at the end of the quarter.

The figures that some campaigns released Sunday are estimates. Details of how much the campaigns raised and spent in the latest period will not be available until the candidates file financial reports with the Federal Election Commission by July 15.

While several Democrats revealed their total sums, Republicans were not expected to announce their figures until Monday or later in the week.

For Obama, vaulting ahead of Clinton in the money race is an important achievement. Despite broad public interest in Obama's candidacy, he trails the New York senator and former first lady in national polls. Polls show the contest to be closer in some key early states and Obama is leading in South Carolina.

Obama aides on Sunday downplayed the polls, but the campaign has begun running biographical ads in Iowa to better acquaint voters with the candidate.

"While voters have a distinctly positive feeling about Barack, they don't have a great depth of knowledge about his life and history of leadership in Illinois and Washington," campaign manager David Plouffe wrote Sunday in an e-mail to supporters. "As we educate voters about Barack, we have strong reason to believe that our already impressive support in the early states will solidify and slowly build later in the year."

In announcing their fundraising totals on Sunday, the Obama campaign moved to ensure that his success would dominate the political news cycle as Clinton embarked on a three-day tour of Iowa with her husband, former President Bill Clinton. The campaign trip is the first time the Clintons have campaigned together in the state.

"Hillary has had a couple of good weeks, but there's nothing like killing momentum for Obama to come in with these unbelievably high fundraising numbers," said Jenny Backus, a Democratic consultant who is not aligned in the presidential contests.

At this point in the campaign, fundraising figures can act as an easy measure of candidate strength and create tiers of contenders based on their ability to amass money.

Other financial tallies can be as telling. That includes a campaign's spending rate, the size of the average donations and how much money can be used in the primary races and how much could only be tapped for the general election.

Several leading candidates in both parties have raised money for both the primary and general elections. The total numbers are misleading, however, because general election money cannot be used unless the candidate becomes the nominee. Early in the year, Obama raised more than Clinton in primary dollars.

Clinton aides have said she would raise "in the range" of $27 million in the April-through-June period in both general and primary election dollars.

Only Republican George W. Bush, in each presidential campaign, raised comparable amounts in the second quarter of the year before the general election. The single-quarter record is $35.1 million, by Bush from April through June in 2003. Clinton captured the first quarter Democratic record with $26 million, covering the first three months of this year. Clinton also transferred $10 million from her Senate campaign account in the first quarter.

Among Republicans, former Massachusetts Gov. Mitt Romney's campaign has said he will fall short of the $20.7 million raised in earlier in the year.

Rudy Giuliani was expected to exceed his first quarter total of $16 million. Sen. John McCain, R-Ariz., was struggling to match the $13.8 million he took in during the first quarter.
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #12 on: July 02, 2007, 11:37:06 PM »
Sen. Hillary Clinton currently leads in national polls, but Sen. Barack Obama raised more money in the second quarter.

 WASHINGTON (CNN)  -- Just when Washington insiders were beginning to think of Sen. Hillary Clinton's nomination as inevitable, here comes Sen. Barack Obama to shake up that assumption with stupendous second-quarter fundraising totals: $32.5 million raised, of which $31 million can be spent in the Democratic primaries.


That's a bigger total take than Clinton's impressive $27 million for the quarter, and half again more than she raised for the primaries ($21 million).

So who's the front-runner now? We're in the middle of the "invisible primary," the year before the election when no actual votes are cast but candidates compete for money and attention.

Historically, the candidate who has raised the most money and leads the polls at the end of the invisible primary (i.e., December 31, 2007) ends up getting the nomination. Except when he doesn't. Howard Dean won the invisible primary in 2003, but was effectively finished a few weeks later after he came in third in Iowa.

At the half-year mark, Obama, D-Illinois, leads Clinton, D-New York, in primary fundraising, although both contenders have raised record amounts of money for Democrats this early in the campaign. Only President Bush has raised more than $30 million in any quarter during the year before the election ($35.1 million the second quarter of 2003).

Obama's take for the last six months ($55.7 million for the Democratic primaries) is larger than the total raised by Howard Dean in the entire year of 2003 ($53 million).

Money is one scorecard. Polls are another, and that's where Obama continues to lag. The latest national poll of Democrats has Clinton leading Obama, 43 to 25 percent, with John Edwards at 17 percent if Al Gore is not included as a candidate, according to a CNN/Opinion Research Corporation poll conducted June 22-24.

Obama's campaign manager David Plouffe wrote, "One of our opponents is also the quasi-incumbent in the race, who in our belief will and should lead just about every national poll from now until the Iowa caucuses. Expect nothing different and attach no significance to it.''

What about the early voting states? A mixed picture. Polls taken in June show Clinton with a big lead over Obama among New Hampshire and Nevada Democrats. Two polls of Iowa Democrats show a tight race among the top three contenders, while the latest poll of South Carolina Democrats puts Obama in the lead.

Obama's record-breaking fundraising numbers signify that the candidate is, indeed, a phenomenon. More impressive than the dollar amounts is the fact that the Obama campaign claims to have raised money from more than 250,000 individuals, most of it in small amounts.

In this case, smaller is better because the campaign can go back and continue to mine those contributors for more money. With that many small contributors, Obama can claim broad grassroots support.

What drives that kind of support? Passion. More than any other candidate, Obama appears to have captured the moment in this campaign with his message of inclusiveness and change.

One of Obama's first television ads, now running in Iowa, pays tribute to his spirit of bipartisanship. "Republican legislators respected Senator Obama,'' a Republican state senator from Illinois says in the ad.

Another ad seeks to embellish Obama's image as an outsider. In the ad, a Harvard law school professor describes Obama as "someone who could've written his ticket on Wall Street" but instead took "all of the talent and all of the learning and decide to devote it to the community and to making people's lives better.''

Does money translate into votes? Not necessarily. Ask Dean or Ross Perot, both of whom spearheaded grassroots movements in previous campaigns. But money does do two things. It enables Obama to run heavy television advertising in the crucial early states, introducing the candidate and his campaign message (and responding to criticism). It also gets the candidate a lot of attention and interest: Obama can be called the front-runner by at least one measure.

Other second-quarter fundraising figures show respectable though not record-breaking takes. John Edwards' $9 million is down from the $14 million he raised in the first quarter. Bill Richardson's $7 million is up a bit from the $6 million he raised in the first quarter. It puts Richardson's total close to Edwards' for the last quarter.

Republican candidates have been slower to report their second-quarter totals (final figures are not due until July 15). But two results seem likely: the total amount raised in the second quarter will break all records for fundraising this early in a campaign, and Democrats will once again out-raise Republicans, just as they did in the first quarter. This means there is an unprecedented amount of public interest in the 2008 campaign.

People seem to be throwing money at the candidates. And most of it is going to the Democrats
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

feverpitch

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,328
  • Money: 894609.00
  • Lachchha Porotta drops a dung cake
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #13 on: July 03, 2007, 05:13:09 AM »
http://commentisfree.guardian.co.uk/michael_tomasky/2007/07/obamas_amazing_haul.html


Barack Obama's amazing haul

The neophyte candidate has raised a staggering $60m so far. He's supposed to be floundering - but someone forgot to tell his donors.

Michael Tomasky

July 2, 2007



Political insiders in America are virtually unanimous: Barack Obama came out of the starting gate like gangbusters but ever since has been a disappointment, performing listlessly in debates and losing (some) ground to Hillary Clinton in poll after poll.

So what's the matter with these 250,000 people who keep giving his campaign money, to the point that he out-raised Clinton (in usable dollars) for the second straight reporting period? Do these people have no respect for the experts?

The facts: American presidential campaigns report their contributions to an overseeing federal board every three months. For the one that just ended on June 30 Obama reported raising a staggering $32.5m, a record among Democrats.

More impressively, he raised that money from the aforementioned 250,000 of his fellow citizens. A normal "donor base" at this point would be more like 60,000. That more than four times this number bothered to send Obama money - an act that requires thought, time and sacrifice where it hurts most - is astounding.

Most impressively of all, the vast majority of these donors are not "maxed out", in the parlance, which is to say they haven't made the maximum donation of $2,300. This means the Obama campaign can go back to them and ask for more, which in turn means the spigot can, potentially, run for months before it goes dry.


He's raised $60m so far. Assuming past patterns hold, he'll raise more in the third and fourth quarters of 2007, meaning he could enter the primary season having raised as much as $140m. We toss millions around these days like peanuts, but $140m is real money. Anyone who lives in Iowa or New Hampshire will see more television commercials for Obama in December than for the iPhone.

What makes Obama's lead in the money war even more surprising is that Clinton is the candidate of the party establishment, with a husband who used to be the president and who has a well-documented talent for getting big people to write big checks.

And yet - while winning the money race, Obama continues to lose ground to Clinton in the two other crucial categories: the polls, where she has an aggregate lead over him in the comfortable double digits, up from single digits in late April; and the insider-journalist conventional wisdom world, which has all but declared Obama a not-ready-for-prime-time disappointment. But somehow the donors have forgotten to be disappointed.

The question about Obama's viability, then, is this: which is more important, the collective assessment of the media insiders (which drives the poll ratings) or the collective hopes of the 250,000 donors?

We'd all like, of course, for me to be able to say decisively and thunderously that the little people trump the insiders. And they might. It seems instinctively true that Obama is appealing to a range of people who aren't typical political donors, like young people and America's large but often ignored (by the media) black middle class. If these groups vote for Obama in larger numbers than they usually vote, they can have a huge impact on the primaries.

They also might not quite be showing up in the polls that have Clinton ahead. This seems especially true of the youth contingent. Polls, of course, are conducted by telephone, and poll respondents are people who are willing to give a stranger asking them questions about politics 20 to 30 minutes of their time in the evening.

Young people sure don't have 20 or 30 minutes to spare after the sun sets. For that matter they don't even have regular telephones anymore. They're also highly unlikely to care what polls and pundits tell them they ought to think. So they might constitute a large army of unmeasured Obama voters.

On the other hand, media insiders do have influence and sometimes can even bend reality to their will. For example, it was never true in 1998 that "America" was so outraged by Bill Clinton's sexual behaviour that people wanted a full-fledged investigation and official report, to say nothing of impeachment proceedings. But media insiders were outraged, so that's what we got.

And bear in mind that recent US history shows that the candidates whose campaigns represented to some extent a kind of uprising against the establishment never became president. Howard Dean raised millions in small Internet donations and won one primary - his home state - out of 31 he entered. So money isn't everything. At some point, Obama will need to make a surge in the media-insider primary.

In the meantime, it's heartening to see that large numbers of regular people are staking $50 and $100 to a candidate they actually believe in, instead of the usual process of lobbyists staking $2,000 on someone they expect to get preferential treatment from. We'll see if the American political system can handle it.
Logged
"In societies where modern conditions of production prevail, all life presents as an immense accumulation of spectacles. Everything that was directly lived has moved away into a representation."

Guy Debord, The Society of the Spectacle

openforum

  • One Day Star
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 417
  • Money: 1000.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #14 on: July 04, 2007, 09:19:51 PM »
I've looked at all the candidates:
           Here are three people I tend to like:
                            Ron Paul (R) - antiwar, promarket(not pro corporate), will definitely be pro-india
                            Obama (D) - kind of against india (voted to end friendship with iran? ), seems to be well informed about the issues,
                    and Edwards (D) - for the reasons mentioned above by Kop

              Obama has an advantage because he doesn't have a long political history to defend. He is charming (and that is very important for a presidential candidate). I think he speaks very well about any issue (whether he believes truly in them or not is another issue) and make sense.
              Ron paul on the other had is a 71 year veteran who has been consistently preaching the same thing. It amazed me how consistent he is. although, I do not agree with some of his positions (eg. gun control, total free market) all of them make sense to me. But sometimes seems like an idealist and not realist. I wished we had some one like this in india who is running for the top post(PM). Wondering if any of you guys have taken notice of him?
Logged

openforum

  • One Day Star
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 417
  • Money: 1000.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #15 on: July 15, 2007, 08:38:55 PM »
I just lost respect for Edwards after watching this(hillary and edwards talking about restricting the debates to the 'serious' candidates):
       <a href="http://www.youtube.com/v/o-WsvQhVmhc&rel=0" target="_blank">http://www.youtube.com/v/o-WsvQhVmhc&rel=0</a>

       
Logged

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #16 on: July 25, 2007, 02:51:17 AM »
Yesterday's CNN-Youtube debates.. lots of links on Youtube..

In my view,
1. good format and good debate.
2. Obama (yes, I was very surprised by his sincerety and depth - I went in a skeptic but liked his grasp of issues), Hillary and Richardson impressed.

The Democratic nomination race ..really is a good one this time.
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

dextrous

  • Administrator
  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16,128
  • Money: 2038476.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #17 on: July 25, 2007, 02:55:26 AM »
This is a great article about last night's debate:
http://www.salon.com/news/feature/2007/07/24/democratic_debate/
Logged

pieterSAN

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 3,429
  • Money: 182991.00
  • Helwe
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #18 on: July 25, 2007, 09:05:05 AM »
Obama (yes, I was very surprised by his sincerety and depth - I went in a skeptic but liked his grasp of issues)

I know...I just hope that he is for real. And yet, I am concerned that this guy would be a target. There people not just in the United States but outside too who would have severe reservations about him in office.
Logged
"...that is me offering you an olive basket... ...and that is you spitting in my face."

Scott Caan as Turk Malloy

openforum

  • One Day Star
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 417
  • Money: 1000.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #19 on: July 26, 2007, 05:55:09 AM »
Yesterday's CNN-Youtube debates.. lots of links on Youtube..

In my view,
1. good format and good debate.
2. Obama (yes, I was very surprised by his sincerety and depth - I went in a skeptic but liked his grasp of issues), Hillary and Richardson impressed.

The Democratic nomination race ..really is a good one this time.



1. I think the format was entertaining... but not good enough to get real answers (the answers were the same as previous debates)
Actually there was no 'debate' just a Q an A session with some entertaining questions. But those were some probing questions.

2. About Obama: I think he is good and knows a lot about many things (MSM trying to push him down by saying he doesn't have experience)
     In the debate though he was not very impressive: dodged two questions- one about his funding coming from businesses and the other about vietnam. Both were directed from gravel(the most entertaining guy ).
Here is a link which has a video(2nd one) showing the difference between hillary and obama(the guy is good):
    http://www.dailykos.com/story/2007/7/17/03841/4491   
 
Logged

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #20 on: August 30, 2007, 09:54:06 AM »
How mighty is the Penn?
Aug 23rd 2007
From The Economist print edition

Is there another Karl Rove waiting in the wings?


A VICTORY lap it wasn't. Karl Rove, who last week announced that he is quitting as George Bush's chief adviser, was all over the political talk shows last weekend. He landed a few punches on the Democrats in general and Hillary Clinton (“fatally flawed”) in particular. But he spent much of his time on the back foot—fending off criticisms of Mr Bush's administration and his own attempt to build a Republican majority. It will all look much better in the light of history, he argued.

All very interesting. But even as Mr Rove defended his achievements, Washington's attention was turning to the question of who will replace him. Not as adviser to Mr Bush; most politicos have given the president up as a lost cause. But who among the plentiful new crop of advisers to would-be presidents will be pre-eminent? Who will design a winning campaign? Who will reshape the political landscape? And how will the new Rove differ from the old Rove?

One candidate stands head and shoulders above all the others: Mrs Clinton's chief strategist, Mark Penn. This is not just because Mrs Clinton is probably the favourite to win the presidency. It is also because Mr Penn is a compelling figure in his own right—a polling genius who has established a huge influence over Mrs Clinton's campaign. Mr Penn is responsible for crafting her political image. He also advises her on everything from long-term strategy to crisis management. Little happens in Hillaryland without Mr Penn's say-so.


There are striking similarities between the new Rove (53) and the old (56). They are both masters of demographic trends and poll data. They are both fixated on the possibility of realigning chunks of the electorate—Latinos in Mr Rove's case, suburban mothers in Mr Penn's. They both like peering into the future. Mr Rove made much of the fact that the president won 97 of the 100 fastest-growing counties in 2004. Mr Penn, who is no fan of Democrats who dream of recreating the New Deal coalition, is about to publish a book, “Microtrends: the Small Forces Behind Tomorrow's Big Changes”.

They both believe that the Democrats' biggest vulnerability lies in national security. Mr Rove kept insisting this weekend that national security might provide the Republicans with the one issue that they can use to win in 2008. Mr Penn has fought hard to persuade Mrs Clinton not to apologise for voting in favour of the war in Iraq. He believes that this would send a message of weakness, and allow the Republicans to begin to reopen the national-security gap.

The Clinton-Penn campaign also has some striking similarities to the Bush-Rove campaign of 2000. Mr Penn was there from the very beginning: he first got to know the Clintons in 1995 and managed Mrs Clinton's Senate campaigns in 2000 and 2006. He has put a premium on the “inevitability factor”—swatting aside Democratic doubters who worry that she is too polarising and cluster-bombing turncoats like David Geffen who back Barack Obama. And Mr Penn has a Rove-like enthusiasm for micromanaging as many details of the campaign as he can.

The power of the centre
The big difference between the two lies in their political philosophy. Mr Penn is a committed centrist who thinks elections are won by wooing swing voters rather than revving up the base. He is happiest with the politics of “triangulation” (ie, poaching supposedly Republican issues) and with micro-issues that are heavy on symbolism, such as school uniforms. He is a visceral foe of the politics of class war as sometimes practised by Bob Shrum, who lost all eight of the presidential campaigns he worked on.

Mr Penn's centrism is partly a matter of personal sympathies. His strongest ties are to conservative Democrats. He cut his teeth working for Ed Koch in New York. He worked closely with the Democratic Leadership Council, and more generally with the so-called “national security” Democrats. He has a long record as a friend of Israel and as an advocate of regime change in Iraq. He helped to run Joe Lieberman's campaign in 2004.

It is also a matter of self-interest. Mr Penn is the very embodiment of the Washington-business nexus. The WPP Group, a public-relations giant, turned him into a multimillionaire when it bought his consulting firm in 2001. It then made him chief executive of one of its subdivisions, Burson-Marsteller, in 2005. Burson-Marsteller is a global behemoth with 100 offices in 59 countries, annual revenues of around $300m, and some of the world's biggest companies among its clients.

This suggests another difference: there is little chance that Mr Penn will try to wield Rove-sized influence over a Clinton White House. This would hardly be a sensible thing to attempt, given that Mrs Clinton's closest and smartest political adviser is her husband. But Mr Penn also has far too much on his plate. Mr Rove was single-mindedly focused on his master's political career (and, indeed, Mr Bush forced him to sell his direct-mailing company in 1999 in order to avoid any possible conflict of interest). Mr Penn continues to run Burson-Marsteller and to manage its Microsoft account himself. Conflict of interest be damned.

This all sounds like a formula for success: a brilliant pollster who will steer his candidate to the centre but who will not try to turn an election victory into a White House empire. Perhaps it will be. But Mr Penn may have a weakness of his own—his umbilical ties to business interests and his visceral distaste for anything that smells of populism. The left already regards him as exemplifying everything that is wrong with the Democratic establishment. Continued economic problems may intensify resentment of the Beltway fat cats. Mr Rove eventually fell because he tried to change American politics too much. Mr Penn's biggest problem—and perhaps Mrs Clinton's too—is that he wants to change too little.
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

dextrous

  • Administrator
  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 16,128
  • Money: 2038476.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #21 on: September 01, 2007, 07:59:15 PM »
Interesting article, LN. Didn't know about Penn. I was expecting the Clintons to recall Carvill one more time for the campaign but I suppose Penn is doing a better job than Carvill, who has lost considerable stock since his fights with Dean.
Logged

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #22 on: September 17, 2007, 03:52:08 AM »
PAGE ONE
Clinton on Health Care, Take 2: Plan Mandates Coverage for All
By LAURA MECKLER
September 15, 2007; Page A1

Thirteen years after Hillary Rodham Clinton's plan for health care went down to disastrous defeat, she is back with a new proposal that again seeks to cover all Americans but reflects some lessons learned.

The Democratic presidential candidate is set to unveil her new approach in Iowa Monday, and she will include a requirement that everyone get health insurance. A big difference from last time: She's proposing to build on the existing system of insuring Americans -- a mix of private coverage and government-subsidized care -- not remake it altogether.

Still, Mrs. Clinton's plan, described by people familiar with it, would involve sweeping change. It would create new federal subsidies to aid those who couldn't afford the required health coverage. And it would impose new mandates on large employers to provide health coverage or help pay for it.

That will surely trigger sharp criticism from conservatives branding her plan government-dictated "HillaryCare" and comparing it to the unwieldy overhaul she proposed 13 years ago during her husband's presidency. Yet she may find Americans more receptive to an expanded federal role in health care, as the national mood has changed since the 1990s and states have experimented with universal-coverage plans.

The number of people without insurance has risen to 47 million from 39.7 million in 1993, and insurance premiums have doubled for those with coverage.

Mrs. Clinton's two principal rivals for the Democratic nomination, John Edwards and Barack Obama, both have comprehensive plans that, like Sen. Clinton's, build on action in the states and place mandates on employers. Republicans Mitt Romney and Rudy Giuliani also have detailed their more market-oriented approaches. Mr. Romney would rely on the states to lead change; Mr. Giuliani wants changes to the federal tax code that would make it easier to buy coverage on the open market.

But no candidate has been as closely watched on the issue as Mrs. Clinton. Health care and Iraq are likely to be the two central issues that define how the New York senator's candidacy is perceived by voters and key constituencies from labor to business.

On the presidential campaign trail, Sen. Clinton regularly mentions her scars from the 1993 effort, saying it gave her the experience to get the job done this time. Aides say she is diligently implementing battle lessons.

Chief among them: Assure people who already like their coverage that they can keep it, and that her plan still offers something for them. To that end, she first offered detailed proposals on reducing health-care costs and improving quality, before moving on to address how she would expand coverage to those who don't have it.

Officials at the Clinton campaign declined to discuss details of the proposal Sen. Clinton is scheduled to release Monday. While people familiar with it said the outline is in place, details could change over the weekend.

Sen. Clinton has telegraphed that, unlike last time, she would be willing to compromise to get a deal. She regularly cites the importance of developing consensus. In recent months, she has met with dozens of executives at large corporations to talk about health care, hoping to forestall a backlash during her campaign and, if she wins, her presidency.

Robert Galvin, director of global health care for General Electric Co., met with her in a small group a few months ago. He says she hit a "home run" in understanding business and its concerns. "I saw in there someone who came out of a tough experience in the '90s wiser, more patient, and with a real understanding of the complexities and how every stakeholder had to have some win," says Mr. Galvin.
[Hillary Clinton]

The Clinton 2007 health plan is likely to be less threatening to the insurance industry, which helped kill her earlier plan. Mrs. Clinton's rhetoric denouncing the industry remains sharp -- but her plan is less so.

Last time, she proposed caps on premiums to hold down costs and a system under which insurance companies would be required to bid for regional business. This time, insurance companies would be required to sell a policy to anyone who applied and would be barred from charging sick people more. But they wouldn't face limits on how much they could charge for premiums generally.

The most significant element of the Clinton plan is expected to be a new requirement for all Americans to have insurance. That disturbs some liberals, who worry that low-income families won't be able to afford it, as well as some conservatives, who object to such a sweeping government mandate. But many health-policy experts say it's essential that everyone be in the insurance system so that healthy people with low medical costs can balance out the sick.

Sen. Edwards, too, has proposed an individual mandate; Sen. Obama has not. Gov. Romney supported the mandate when he was governor of Massachusetts but has not endorsed it nationally.

To help people get insurance, Sen. Clinton would establish federal subsidies for lower-income Americans and create new pools where individuals and small businesses could shop for private health plans.

She is also likely to require that some employers, likely large ones, either cover their workers or help pay the cost of their coverage elsewhere. That will be controversial with employers that don't provide insurance, though likely welcomed by those that do. Exempting small business could eliminate opposition from small-business owners, who helped lead the effort to kill the 1993 plan.

Sen. Clinton also supports expansion of the joint federal-state Children's Health Insurance Program. Conservatives led by President Bush oppose that, saying it's a step toward government-run insurance for all, in what has become something of a proxy for the larger health-coverage debate.

Politically, analysts say the health issue cuts both ways for Sen. Clinton. Polls suggest Americans trust her more than any presidential candidate of either party when it comes to health. A July Gallup poll found that 65% of all voters had a great deal or a fair amount of confidence that she would do the "right thing" for the health-care system. Among Democrats, the figure was 91%.

"People see her as very committed to health care and making sure people in this country have coverage," says Bill McInturff, a Republican pollster who worked for opponents of the original Clinton plan and now works for Republican presidential candidate John McCain. Still, he said, Mrs. Clinton is vulnerable among swing voters and Republicans, particularly if she produces a health plan that is seen as too complicated or too government-driven.

In certain circles, her name is synonymous with big, government-run health. Republicans regularly deride health care proposals they don't like as "HillaryCare." A summary of Mr. Romney's health care plan, posted on his Web site, contains the word "Hillary" 23 times, attacks her 1993 plan as "socialized medicine" and is headlined, "The Romney Vision: Conservative, Market-Based Health Care Vs. Hillarycare."

Sen. Clinton says she has learned her lessons. For one, in 1993 the White House got too mired in the details, delivering to Congress a 1,342-page bill for consideration. By giving so many specifics, the Clintons gave opponents with special interests easy fodder to kill the plan, while the public was bewildered.

By contrast, her aides speak admiringly of President Bush's approach on many domestic issues: put out general principles, negotiate the details with Congress and, more often that not, declare victory when a bill reaches his desk.

At one stage, Mrs. Clinton's aides considered not presenting a specific plan for covering the uninsured, noting that many Americans thought she had one already. But pressure from other candidates and from the powerful Service Employers International Union persuaded her to come forward. Messrs. Obama and Edwards had criticized her for sticking to generalities even as they offered specifics.

Aides say Sen. Clinton knows that the White House erred last time in failing to woo Congress, meaning her plan had few champions on Capitol Hill. In her later White House years, Mrs. Clinton learned to work more effectively with Congress and saw some successes, such as bipartisan passage of the Children's Health Insurance Program.

Since winning election to the Senate in 2000, Mrs. Clinton has worked with Republicans on a range of health issues. She allied with Republican Sen. Lindsey Graham of South Carolina on health benefits for veterans, although he had served as a manager of the effort to impeach her husband. She has even exchanged warm words on health with former House Speaker Newt Gingrich, who helped lead the effort to torpedo her 1993 plan.
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #23 on: November 07, 2007, 06:54:28 AM »
Surprise, surprise.. Ron Paul, the libertarian's campaign is picking steam. The Howard Dean of Republicans!!
..
http://www.nytimes.com/2007/11/06/us/politics/06paul.html

Candidate’s Pleased to Remember This Fifth of November
By DAVID D. KIRKPATRICK

Historians and British schoolchildren remember Guy Fawkes as the Roman Catholic, anti-Protestant rebel who on Nov. 5, 1605, tried to assassinate King James I by blowing up the Parliament. Supporters of the Republican primary campaign of the libertarian Representative Ron Paul may remember Fawkes as a wildly successful fund-raising gimmick.

On Monday, a group of Paul supporters helped raised more than $4.07 million in one day — approaching what the campaign raised in the entire last quarter — through a Web site called ThisNovember5th.com, a reference to the day the British commemorate the thwarted bombing.

Many fans of Mr. Paul know of the day primarily through a movie based on the futuristic graphic novel “V for Vendetta,” by Alan Moore and David Lloyd, in which a terrorist modeled after Fawkes battles a fascist government that has taken over Britain.

The Paul campaign has raised more than $6.84 million in the first five weeks of this quarter, more than the $5 million it raised from July 1 to Oct. 1. Many of the contributions appeared to come through the independent Fawkes effort, but how much was unclear.


On Monday alone, the campaign signed up more than 21,000 new donors, said Jesse Benton, a campaign spokesman.


Among 2008 presidential candidates, Senator Hillary Rodham Clinton of New York holds the record for raising the most in a single day: $6.2 million on June 30. But Mr. Paul has surpassed the best day of Mitt Romney, the former Massachusetts governor, who raised $3.14 million on Jan. 8.

ThisNovember5th.com includes video clips and the text of a speech by Mr. Paul, a 10-term Texas congressman. In it, Mr. Paul declares, “The true patriot challenges the state when the state embarks on enhancing its power at the expense of the individual.”

Mr. Paul has stood out from the Republican field for his opposition to the war in Iraq. In the speech he argues that the fight against terrorism is threatening American democracy.

“The American Republic is in remnant status,” he says. “The stage is set for our country eventually devolving into military dictatorship, and few seem to care.”

Mr. Benton clarified that Mr. Paul did not support blowing up government buildings. “He wants to demolish things like the Department of Education,” Mr. Benton said, “but we can do that very peacefully, in a constructive manner.”

---
November 6, 2007
Presidential shocker: Paul raises more than $4 million in 24 hours

Monday proved to be a very lucrative day according to the Paul campaign.

WASHINGTON (CNN) - Rep. Ron Paul raised more than $4 million on the Internet Monday from more than 35,000 donors, a spokesman for the Texas Republican’s presidential campaign told CNN.

Online supporters of the Texas congressman organized the fundraising push around Guy Fawkes Day, the November 5 holiday that marks Englishman Guy Fawkes' foiled attempt to blow up the Houses of Parliament in 1605, subject of the recent film “V for Vendetta.”

The creator of the Web site that pushed the Paul fundraising drive said the message is not violent, but rather a fundraising idea that spread virally on-line. The Texas congressman’s spokesman said the idea did not come from Paul, but he did promote it in recent speeches.

Paul is the only Republican candidate who is calling for the removal of U.S. troops from Iraq. He also advocates for limited government and is anti-abortion rights. While Paul registers in the low single digits in most polls, he raised a very respectable $5 million in the third quarter fundraising period.
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #24 on: November 07, 2007, 06:59:00 AM »
Analysis: Don't bet the presidency on polls 1 year out

* Story Highlights
    * Democratic front-runners one year before election usually stumble
    * Walter Mondale and Al Gore only dems to lead polls one year out and win
    * Republican front-runner one year out usually wins nomination
    * Sen. Clinton's dominant lead may reverse trend

MANCHESTER, New Hampshire (CNN) -- It's one year until Election Day 2008. Do the current polls tell us anything a year before the election? Yes, they tell us something, but you have to be careful.

Al Gore was the last front-runner one year out to win the Democratic nomination.

The polls tell us Sen. Hillary Clinton is the clear front-runner for the Democratic nomination and Rudy Giuliani's the Republican front-runner. So is it all over, before it even begins?

Be careful with a poll, says New Hampshire Institute of Politics Director Paul Manuel. "It's not a predictor. It's a tool. It's a useful way to understand what's happening at that moment and nothing more."

Let's look at the record of polls taken a year before the election.

Polls predicting the Democratic nominees have mostly been wrong. Surveys taken in November 1971 predicted the Democrats would nominate Edward Kennedy or Edmund Muskie. In 1972, the Democrats nominated George McGovern.

In November 1975, the polls predicted Kennedy again. The next year, the Democrats nominated Jimmy Carter.

In early November 1979, the polls predicted Kennedy would defeat Carter for the Democratic nomination. He didn't.
Don't Miss

In 1987, Jesse Jackson was the Democratic front-runner. In 1988, Michael Dukakis was the Democratic nominee.Video Watch the accuracy of previous year-ahead predictions »

Mario Cuomo led the Democratic field in November 1991. In 1992, the Democrats nominated Bill Clinton.

Howard Dean was well on his way to getting the Democratic nomination in November 2003, until John Kerry took it away from him.

Only twice have polls the year before correctly predicted the Democratic nominee. Walter Mondale in 1983 and Al Gore in 1999. Both won the nomination the following year. And both were current or former vice presidents.

On the Republican side, the polls have almost always been right the year before. They predicted Ronald Reagan's nomination in 1980, George H.W. Bush's nomination in 1988, Bob Dole's in 1996 and George W. Bush's in 2000.

Republican polls a year out got it wrong only once, in 1976. The polls in 1975 predicted Reagan. The next year Republicans nominated incumbent President Gerald Ford.

In the past, the Republican nominating process has usually been an orderly succession. Predictable. The Democrats have had a free-for-all. Unpredictable.

"Historically, the Democrats have been an alliance of many different groups and the Republicans are a more narrow band," says Manuel.

If that's still true, the message to Republicans is, it's Rudy Giuliani. And to Democrats, don't bet on Hillary Clinton.

But is it still true? Don't bet on it.

This time, the Democratic front-runner has a bigger lead. And the Democrats say they're more satisfied with their choices. So this time, the Democrats look like they may have an orderly succession. And the Republicans may have a free-for-all. A topsy-turvy year.


When it comes to predicting the general election winner, the record of the polls a year out is actually pretty good.

A year before the election, polls predicted Reagan would defeat Mondale in 1984, Bush would defeat Dukakis in 1988, Clinton would beat Dole in 1996, Bush would defeat Gore -- by 16 points! -- in 2000 and Bush would beat Kerry in 2004.

The year-before polls got it wrong twice. In 1979, the polls predicted Carter would beat Reagan. And in 1991, they predicted the first President Bush would defeat Bill Clinton.

In both cases, voters a year out expected the president to get re-elected.
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #25 on: December 02, 2007, 05:42:13 PM »
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071201/NEWS09/71201009/-1/caucus

December 1, 2007


Obama pulls ahead for Democrats in Iowa Poll

By THOMAS BEAUMONT
REGISTER STAFF WRITER

Barack Obama has pulled ahead in the race for Iowa's Democratic presidential caucuses, while the party's national frontrunner Hillary Clinton has slipped to second in the leadoff nominating state, according to The Des Moines Register's new Iowa Poll.

Despite the movement, the race for 2008's opening nominating contest remains very competitive about a month before the Jan. 3 caucuses, just over half of likely caucusgoers who favor a candidate saying they could change their minds.

Obama, an Illinois senator, leads for the first time in the Register's poll as the choice of 28 percent of likely caucusgoers, up from 22 percent in October. Clinton, a New York senator, was the preferred candidate of 25 percent, down from 29 percent in the previous poll.

Former North Carolina Sen. John Edwards, who led in the Register's May poll, held steady with 23 percent, in third place, but part of the three-way battle.

The lead change appears after weeks of increasing criticism of Clinton by Obama and Edwards about her position on U.S. policy toward Iran and questions of her candor.

Meanwhile, Clinton has recently begun accusing Obama of inexperience and criticizing his proposal to expand health insurance coverage.

The poll shows what has continued to be a wide gap between the top three candidates and the remainder of the field. The telephone survey of 500 likely Democratic caucusgoers was conducted Nov. 25 to 28 and has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.

Iowa City Democrat Katharyn Browne said she abandoned her support for Clinton in the past month and now supports Obama in light of the Iran issue.

Obama spent weeks in October and November attacking Clinton's support for a measure that allowed President Bush to declare the Iran's Revolutionary Guard a terrorist organization, a move Obama said was a step toward war. Clinton said the measure enhanced U.S. negotiating strength with Iran.

"An Iran war terrifies me," said Browne, a 30-year-old University of Iowa student.

Browne said she feels Obama is a more inspirational candidate than Clinton, despite the intensifying crossfire between them.

"I just think that Obama is more of a positive candidate overall," she said. "Aside from the Clinton-Obama interaction lately, it's nice to hear a candidate with a positive outlook. I think our country needs that right now."

Browne, who supported Clinton early partly out of gender loyalty, represents a shift among some women caucusgoers from Clinton to Obama.

In the new poll, Obama leads with support from 31 percent of women likely attend the caucuses, compared to 26 percent for Clinton. In October, Clinton was the preferred candidate of 34 percent of women caucusgoers, compared to 21 percent for Obama.

Women represent roughly six in 10 Democratic caucusgoers, according to the new poll.


Obama also dominates among younger caucusgoers, with support from 48 percent from those younger than 35. Clinton was the choice of 19 percent in that group and Edwards of 17 percent.

The under-35 bloc represents 14 percent of Democratic caucusgoers, up from 9 percent in the October poll.

Obama has an advantage among first-time caucusgoers. He also leads among people who say they definitely will attend the caucuses.

Clinton is the top choice among caucusgoers 55 years old and older. The largest share of Democratic caucusgoers — exactly half — are in this age group.

Pleasant Hill Democrat Jack Hill is one of them. The 61-year-old salesman said Clinton is battle-tested and capable of bringing about changes on the domestic and international fronts.

"She's a tough old cookie," said Hill. "She's a tough woman and I feel we need a change from politics as usual."

Clinton continued to rate highest on key traits, such as most presidential, knowledgeable about the world, electable and experienced. She also was seen as the most ego-driven and negative.

Clinton and Obama were viewed as the most committed to public service, while Obama led on traits such as most likeable, principled and best able bring together Republicans and Democrats.

The former first lady continues to face stubborn misgivings, despite her dozens of visits to the state this year and increasing campaign presence of her husband, the popular former president.

Thirty percent of Democratic caucusgoers viewed Sen. Clinton as either mostly or very unfavorably, behind U.S. Rep. Dennis Kucinich of Ohio and former Alaska Sen. Mike Gravel. She topped the list of candidates whose nomination would be one of the biggest disappointments at 27 percent.

Other troubling news for Clinton included a sharp decline in support from members of union households, where she was the preferred candidate with support from 34 percent in the October poll. In the new poll, Clinton is third among union households with 21 percent.

Obama and Edwards have recently criticized Clinton's past support for the North American Free Trade Agreement, which they argue cost the United States millions of jobs. Clinton has said recently the trade pact, enacted during her husband's first term, did not deliver.

Obama's support among caucusgoers from union households rose from 20 percent to 28 percent since the October poll, while Edwards narrowly led, rising from 24 percent to 29 percent since the October poll.

Edwards, who finished second in the 2004 caucuses, led narrowly among men in the new poll and was tied with Clinton for the favorite in Iowa's rural areas. Rural Centerville Democrat Candace Scritchfield supported Edwards in 2004 and plans to again.

"He's a very down-to-earth and trustworthy person," said Scritchfield, a 44-year-old homemaker. "He has a lot of loyalty, that I can tell."

There was little movement in the rest of the field, despite aggressive campaigning in Iowa in the eight weeks between the two polls.

New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson remained in fourth place as the choice of 9 percent and Delaware Sen. Joe Biden remained in fifth with 6 percent, both virtually unchanged from the October poll. All others had support from 2 percent or less.

Presidential preferences include people leaning toward supporting a candidate. Seven percent said they were uncommitted or unsure about whom to support.

Reporter Thomas Beaumont can be reached at (515) 286-2532 or tbeaumont@dmreg.com.

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071202/NEWS09/312020005/0/caucus

December 2, 2007


Huckabee new GOP leader in Iowa Poll

By JONATHAN ROOS
REGISTER STAFF WRITER

Mike Huckabee has leaped ahead of Republican presidential rival Mitt Romney in Iowa, seizing first place in a new Des Moines Register poll of likely Republican caucus participants.


Huckabee wins the support of 29 percent of Iowans who say they definitely or probably will attend the Republican Party's caucuses on Jan. 3. That's a gain of 17 percentage points since the last Iowa Poll was taken in early October, when Huckabee trailed both Romney and Fred Thompson.

Other poll findings indicate that the former Arkansas governor is making the most of a low-budget campaign by tapping into the support of Iowa's social conservatives.

Romney, who has invested more time and money campaigning in the state than any other GOP candidate, remains in the thick of the Iowa race with the backing of 24 percent of likely caucusgoers. But that's a drop of 5 points since October for the former Massachusetts governor.

Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, the frontrunner in national polls, holds third place in Iowa at 13 percent, despite waging a limited campaign in the state.

Thompson, a former U.S. senator from Tennessee who waited until September to formally enter the race for the Republican nomination, has slipped to fourth place in the Iowa Poll, at 9 percent.

U.S. Sen. John McCain of Arizona and U.S. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas are tied for fifth place at 7 percent each. Four other candidates trail them. The new Iowa Poll, conducted over four days last week, has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.

The complexion of the race could easily change in the last month of intense campaigning ahead of the caucuses, which lead off the presidential nominating process. Roughly six in 10 likely Republican caucus participants say they could still be persuaded to support another candidate. Poll participant Thelma Whittaker, a retired teacher from Columbus Junction, is leaning toward supporting Huckabee in the caucuses but also could back Romney.

"I'm a very conservative Republican and I feel that (Huckabee) follows through with those ideas," said Whittaker, who is troubled by the country's moral decline. On the other hand, she wonders if Huckabee is a strong enough candidate to win the White House for the GOP.

When it comes to Romney, "I go along with a lot of his ideas,'" Whittaker said, "but he's also done some flip-flopping that scares me on issues like abortion and taxes."

Huckabee has come a long way since last May, when he languished in a tie for sixth place in the Register's poll, garnering the support of just 4 percent of likely caucus participants then.

His campaign picked up steam after he notched a surprising second-place finish in the Iowa Republican Party's straw poll in August.

The Register's new scientific poll shows Huckabee, a former Baptist minister, leading Romney 38 percent to 22 percent among those who consider themselves born-again Christians. In October, Romney edged Huckabee 23 percent to 18 percent among people in that group, which accounts for one-half of all likely caucus participants.

Similarly, Huckabee holds a 2-to-1 lead over Romney among those who say it is more important for a presidential candidate to be socially conservative than fiscally conservative.

Here are some other key comparisons for the two leading candidates in the poll:

- Huckabee leads Romney among men, 28 percent to 20 percent. They run neck-and-neck among women.

- Huckabee draws more support than Romney among caucusgoers between the ages of 35 and 54, while Romney does better among younger adults. They compete almost evenly among those 55 or older.

Older Iowans generally turn out in larger numbers for the caucuses than do younger adults.

- Both candidates are regarded favorably by more than three-fourths of likely caucus participants.

- Huckabee outscores Romney and the rest of the Republican field as the candidate seen as the most socially conservative, the most civil in tone and the most principled.

- Romney leads on six characteristics, including the most presidential of the GOP candidates, the most fiscally conservative and the best able to bring about real change.

Giuliani, the poll's third-place finisher, is seen as the most electable of the candidates and also has a slight edge as the most effective negotiator and the best able to bring Republicans and Democrats together.

On the other hand, Giuliani is seen by more likely caucus participants as the most ego-driven of the candidates.

Other poll findings show that Giuliani is more of a polarizing figure than the other top-tier candidates in Iowa:

- Thirty-four percent of likely caucusgoers see him as one of the worst choices for the Republican nomination. Paul ranks second in that category, at 26 percent.

- While 61 percent regard Giuliani favorably, 38 percent have unfavorable feelings toward him. Only Paul has a higher unfavorable mark in the poll, at 44 percent.

"He's too New York," Whittaker, the retired teacher, said of Giuliani. "He doesn't understand us. He doesn't care to understand us."

But poll participant Mark Pottorff, an agronomist from Sergeant Bluff, sides with those who have a high regard for Giuliani, citing his experience as a federal prosecutor and big-city mayor.

"He is tough on crime and during September 2001 he led New York City through some very tough and dark days," said Pottorff, 51. "I think he has the ability and the fortitude to stand up to dictators and terrorists."

Pottorff's second choice for the Republican presidential nomination is Romney, citing his experience in business and government and his commitment to his family.

Other poll findings show Thompson, the fourth-place finisher overall, tying with Huckabee as the candidate who is most like Ronald Reagan — the Republican president often cited by party leaders as their role model.

Paul, an opponent of the war in Iraq, has the dubious distinction as the GOP candidate who outpolls his rivals as the most negative contender.

But Paul, who has a loyal following and a well-funded campaign, has been creeping up in the Register's polls this year of likely caucus participants, matching McCain's level of support in the latest survey.

Reporter Jonathan Roos can be reached at (515) 284-8443 or jroos@dmreg.com

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
 
 
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

openforum

  • One Day Star
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 417
  • Money: 1000.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #26 on: December 02, 2007, 11:23:57 PM »
http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071201/NEWS09/71201009/-1/caucus



Obama, an Illinois senator, leads for the first time in the Register's poll as the choice of 28 percent of likely caucusgoers, up from 22 percent in October. Clinton, a New York senator, was the preferred candidate of 25 percent, down from 29 percent in the previous poll.



Browne, who supported Clinton early partly out of gender loyalty, represents a shift among some women caucusgoers from Clinton to Obama.

In the new poll, Obama leads with support from 31 percent of women likely attend the caucuses, compared to 26 percent for Clinton. In October, Clinton was the preferred candidate of 34 percent of women caucusgoers, compared to 21 percent for Obama.








Mike Huckabee has leaped ahead of Republican presidential rival Mitt Romney in Iowa, seizing first place in a new Des Moines Register poll of likely Republican caucus participants.



Romney, who has invested more time and money campaigning in the state than any other GOP candidate, remains in the thick of the Iowa race with the backing of 24 percent of likely caucusgoers. But that's a drop of 5 points since October for the former Massachusetts governor.

Former New York mayor Rudy Giuliani, the frontrunner in national polls, holds third place in Iowa at 13 percent, despite waging a limited campaign in the state.

Thompson, a former U.S. senator from Tennessee who waited until September to formally enter the race for the Republican nomination, has slipped to fourth place in the Iowa Poll, at 9 percent.

U.S. Sen. John McCain of Arizona and U.S. Rep. Ron Paul of Texas are tied for fifth place at 7 percent each. Four other candidates trail them. The new Iowa Poll, conducted over four days last week, has a margin of error of plus or minus 4.4 percentage points.

 


Interesting developments.. its amazing how people vote (based on gender, name recognition) even in a developed country...

Obama win in Iowa will catapult him in the national polls like kerry in 2004.

Huckabee's rise is dramatic but he might get pulled down in the next 3 weeks.

Republican race is wide open (any of the 6 can be nominated based on how IA, NH, SC unflod..).

Whats your favourite ticket? (meaning who do you think are the best candidates on each side? Not the ones who has the best chance to win but the ones who are best for America)
« Last Edit: December 02, 2007, 11:26:43 PM by openforum »
Logged

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #27 on: December 03, 2007, 06:11:49 AM »
OF:
1. Huckabee's rise was expected. Iowa Republicans are dominated by social conservatives and Romney and Guliani realistically were not going to do well there. I think Romney and Guiliani just want to finish second in Iowa. Romney should win NH barring some disaster. Then the race will tighten up between Romney and Guiliani. Huckabee should fade away after the Iowa win. The Republicans will move to the center this year...while the Christian conservatives will try to move the party to the right.

2. Hillary can afford to finish 2nd or even 3rd in Iowa. She can even afford to finish 2nd in NH...she won't. Once she is through with Iowa and NH.. she will clean up the rest of the states. Obama's only hope is to win Iowa and maybe NH .. and make the race somewhat competitive for the rest of the states. If Edwards finishes 3rd in Iowa, his campaign is over. If Hillary wins Iowa, the Democratic race is over...she will wrap-up the nomination.

3. Before I answer your best candidates question, let me set the context. I am a Republican but campaigned against Bush in 2004. I think the country and the world needs a "total opposite of Bush" administration. This country needs to rebound from the incompetence, arrogance, and divisiveness of this administration. For this reason, my opinion is currently clouded by one objective...a Democratic ticket that can beat anybody the Republicans put up. From that point of view, to me a Hillary/Edwards(or someone respectable from South) ticket will win the Democrats the white house. Hillary is fairly centrist and in a general election, she should overwhelmingly carry the woman vote. Edwards(or the chosen Southerner) should deliver at least 1 or 2 Southern states...which will be sufficient to break the Republican hold on the Bible belt. If it were not for the circumstances created by this administration, I would have like Paul or even Romney to win the Republican nomination and win the General Election. For now, I am rooting for Hillary...hope she doesn't stumble.

Finally, if the economy goes into recession this quarter and in early 2008.. Democrats will sweep the Presidential and Congressional elections...irrespective of the candidate.
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

feverpitch

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 6,328
  • Money: 894609.00
  • Lachchha Porotta drops a dung cake
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #28 on: December 06, 2007, 02:02:11 AM »
http://www.guardian.co.uk/uselections08/story/0,,2222697,00.html

Huckabee, the bumblebee, rises to the top on a wing and a prayer

The latest standard-bearer of the right plays the evangelic Christian card - and polishes his stand-up routine

Suzanne Goldenberg in Des Moines
Thursday December 6, 2007
The Guardian




This could be Mike Huckabee's 15 minutes. Or it could be the moment when the southern preacher with a nice line in one-liners begins his ascent to the White House. It all comes down to faith, and the power of evangelical Christians to decide the Republican nomination.

For today, Huckabee is on top. Every day this week has produced an opinion poll with good news for a candidate who barely registered on the political radar a month ago. On Sunday the Des Moines Register put Huckabee at the top of the Republican pack in Iowa with 29% of the vote, vaulting past Mitt Romney, who has spent $7m (£3.4m) in the state to Huckabee's $370,000. Huckabee is now rising in polls across the country.

After 11 lonely months, he is trailed by multiple TV crews everywhere he goes in Iowa, and fought over as a guest for the chat shows. It is a giddy sensation.

Huckabee, a former governor of Arkansas who mixes folksy charm with bedrock Christian conservative views, likens his rise to the aeronautics of the bumblebee. "It's scientifically impossible for the bumblebee to fly," he told a crowd in the small town of Newton. "But the bumblebee, being unaware of these scientific facts, flies anyway."

Huckabee got off the ground by shedding weight. Now 52, he was in his mid-40s and tipping the scales at 136kg (21st 6lbs) when his doctor told him that he was heading for an early death from diabetes. He lost more than 45kg in three years, ran four marathons, and began preaching the benefits of healthy eating to Arkansas state employees, with cash payouts if they gave up smoking and began exercising.

Huckabee's campaign took off in Iowa because he makes people laugh and defies easy categorisation. Although he had a career as a preacher before his decade as governor of Arkansas, his routine is much closer to stand-up than fire and brimstone.

He also has a biography that appeals to Iowans: humble. As Huckabee tells it, he is a lifelong underdog. Like another more famous Arkansan, Bill Clinton, Huckabee is from the small town of Hope. His father was a fireman; he was the first in his family to graduate from high school. The too-big suits he wears on the campaign trail look like a relic of his earlier, heavier days.

The ordinariness resonates in small towns, where there is resentment of the high-spending candidates such as Romney, a former venture capitalist.

"Huckabee's real. He is not phoney. He is making it work without the big television ads," said Nola Jones, who went to a coffee meeting with Huckabee.

Broader following

The surprisingly edgy jokes and the support for action on climate change, music education, college scholarships for the children of illegal immigrants, and government incentives for the obese to lose weight - all positions not usually associated with conservative Republicans - have also given Huckabee the chance of a broader following.

"He seems to me to be one of the least mean Republican candidates," said Doug Engstrom, a Democrat, after watching Huckabee deliver his routine.

At heart, however, Huckabee remains a Christian and deeply conservative. He wants to abolish income tax and replace it with a sales tax. He believes it should be easier to sack judges. "There are some people who should simply get the heave-ho," he said. His strategy for winning Iowa is anchored in his credentials as an evangelical: his opposition to abortion and gay marriage, his adherence to what he calls a culture of life.

His television adverts open with the words "Christian Leader" in large white capitals. "Faith doesn't just influence me. It really defines me. I don't have to wake up every day wondering what do I need to believe," he says in the ad.

The open religiosity is calculated. Evangelicals make up a much higher share of the Republican electorate in Iowa than elsewhere, 35% to 50% of caucus-goers, and Huckabee has courted them relentlessly. "They like someone who has been consistent in his beliefs and I think they identify very clearly with his Christian background," said Bonnie Paul, a member of the Republican state party central committee.

Evangelicals actually had few other options. Rudy Giuliani, with his three marriages and liberal views on abortion and gay rights, remains unacceptable to midwestern conservatives, despite winning the support of the televangelist Pat Robertson. John McCain and Fred Thompson have hardly campaigned in the state. The other candidate of the Christian right, Sam Brownback, a Republican senator from Kansas, dropped out during the summer.

Romney has an exemplary family life but he is a relatively recent subscriber to an anti-abortion cause, and his Mormon faith is viewed by many evangelicals as a cult - a feeling Huckabee has tried to exploit through televised expressions of his own faith.

"I'm just not going to go off into evaluating other people's doctrines and faiths," Huckabee has said. "I think that is absolutely not a role for a president." But he has yet to publicly repudiate the idea that Mormonism is a cult.

Blind faith

Other aspects of his faith give pause. Huckabee does not believe in evolution, and says that intelligent design, the modern version of creationism, should be taught in schools. "I believe God created the heavens and the earth," he said. "[Creation is] one of the many explanations for the origins of earth."

It is, in Huckabee's telling of the story, also how the bumblebee flies: blind faith. But sustaining flight on a wing and a prayer could be difficult for Huckabee as he faces increased scrutiny of his view of the world and how his Christian beliefs would sit in an administration.

His challenge now is to use his sudden and unexpected surge in popularity to raise funds and build a campaign organisation not just in Iowa, but in the other primary states, where his presence still does not register.

But he also has to get up to speed on issues such as defence and foreign policy. Huckabee was entirely unaware of the story that has dominated the news for the past 48 hours - that America's intelligence agencies now believe that Iran has not had a nuclear programme since 2003, he admitted during a dinner with reporters on Tuesday night. He was too busy enjoying his close-up.

Huckaboom boom: His best gags

"Q and A. That stands for question and avoid."

On negative campaigning: "I hate all the negative stuff, you know. It all hurts my feelings, and I go home and I have to take medication to sleep. Usually half a baby aspirin gets it."

On getting a sign of approval: "She kind of gave me a thumbs up, which is the digit I like to see when I only see one coming at me, so that's good."

On eating habits in the south: "If it can be eaten, it can be battered and fried. If it's an entree we put gravy on it; if it's a dessert we put sugar on it."

When asked what Jesus would do about the death penalty: "Jesus was too smart to ever run for public office, that's what Jesus would do."

"If you are committed to vote for us, I don't care how deep the snow is, you've got to get out and caucus ... if you have got a neighbour that is not going to vote for me do not let him out of his driveway. Keep him home ... tell him that there is no point in going out because you have shovelled all of your snow into his driveway right behind his car."
Logged
"In societies where modern conditions of production prevail, all life presents as an immense accumulation of spectacles. Everything that was directly lived has moved away into a representation."

Guy Debord, The Society of the Spectacle

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #29 on: December 06, 2007, 10:48:09 PM »
Bollywood Obama ;D ;D

[youtube=425,350]sA-451XMsuY[/youtube]
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #30 on: December 16, 2007, 06:30:47 AM »
This is huge for Hillary..
--
http://desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071215/NEWS/71215016

The Register's caucus endorsements: McCain, Clinton

THE DES MOINES REGISTER

The Des Moines Register’s editorial board has endorsed Republican Sen. John McCain and Democratic Sen. Hillary Clinton for the 2008 Iowa caucuses.

The Register, Iowa’s statewide newspaper, calls McCain and Clinton the candidates it believes are most competent and ready to lead.

“With dissension at home and distrust abroad, as American troops continue to fight wars on two fronts, the times call for two essential qualities in the next American president,” the Register’s editorial board concluded. “Those qualities became the paramount considerations in making endorsements for the Democratic and Republican nominees in the 2008 Iowa caucuses.

“The times call for competence. Americans want their government to work again.

The times call for readiness to lead. Americans want their country to do great things again. They’ll regain trust in their government when they see a president make that happen.”

In endorsing McCain, who was tied for fifth in the Register’s November Iowa Poll of likely caucus-goers, the newspaper’s editorial board wrote:

“Time after time, McCain has stuck to his beliefs in the face of opposition from other elected leaders and the public. He has criticized crop and ethanol subsidies during two presidential campaigns in Iowa. He bucked his party and president by opposing the 2001 and 2003 tax cuts. A year ago, in the face of growing criticism, he staunchly supported President Bush’s decision to increase troop strength in Iraq.

“McCain would enter the White House with deep knowledge of national-security and foreign-policy issues. He knows war, something we believe would make him reluctant to start one. He’s also a fierce defender of civil liberties. As a survivor of torture, he has stood resolutely against it. He pledges to start rebuilding America’s image abroad. …

“The force of John McCain’s moral authority could go a long way toward restoring Americans’ trust in government and inspiring new generations to believe in the goodness and greatness of America.”

The Register’s endorsement of Clinton comes at a time when polls show she has slipped behind Sen. Barack Obama in Iowa.

“Readiness to lead sets her apart from a constellation of possible stars in her party, particularly Barack Obama, who also demonstrates the potential to be a fine president,” the newspaper’s endorsement editorial concludes. “When Obama speaks before a crowd, he can be more inspirational than Clinton. Yet, with his relative inexperience, it’s hard to feel as confident he could accomplish the daunting agenda that lies ahead.”

Register editorial page editor Carol Hunter said the six editorial board members who participated in the endorsement process disregarded the candidates’ standing in Iowa or national polls.

“We believe our job as an editorial board is to arrive at the candidate in each party we think would be the best president, whether a person is leading the polls or garnering 1 percent support,” Hunter wrote in a column that accompanied the editorials. “It’s not to predict a winner.”

In 2004, the newspaper’s endorsement of John Edwards coincided with his dramatic surge in the state. Edwards, then a North Carolina senator, moved from single digits in an Iowa poll taken in November 2003 to a second-place finish in the state’s 2004 January caucuses.


This year’s endorsements come less than three weeks before the caucuses, set for Jan. 3. The caucuses, held five days before the New Hampshire primaries, start the nation’s 2008 presidential election process.

The Register’s editorial board members who participated in the endorsement process were: Laura Hollingsworth, publisher; Carolyn Washburn, editor; Carol Hunter, editorial page editor; Linda Lantor Fandel, deputy editorial page editor; Rox Laird, editorial writer; and Andie Dominick, editorial writer.
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #31 on: December 19, 2007, 12:42:15 AM »
Giuliani in a free fall....

---
Giuliani Begins Retreat From New Hampshire

BY NICHOLAS WAPSHOTT - Staff Reporter of the Sun
December 18, 2007
URL: http://www.nysun.com/article/68209

Rudolph Giuliani's decision to largely abandon the early voting state of New Hampshire and concentrate his efforts on the Florida primary three weeks later reflects an uncomfortable truth for the former New York mayor: The more he campaigned in the Granite State and the more he spent on advertising there, the more his poll numbers dropped.

Mr. Giuliani appears to be making a virtue of necessity by sounding the retreat in New Hampshire, where he continues to be outgunned by the Republican front-runner there, Mitt Romney, and where he has been beaten into second place by the resurgent campaign of Senator McCain.

He must now be sure to win Florida on January 29 to capture its large cache of delegates, as part of a strategy that sees him withdrawing from the smaller early states in favor of states such as New York, California, and Florida, which send large numbers of delegates to the nominating convention.

However, the wisdom of that strategy was cast in doubt yesterday by the latest poll in Mr. Giuliani's home state of New York showing the mayor's lead over his nearest Republican rivals cut by 11 points.

Mr. Giuliani now leads 37% to Michael Huckabee's 12% in New York, with 11% for Mr. McCain, 7% for Fred Thompson, and 5% each for Mr. Romney and Rep. Ron Paul, according to a new Quinnipiac poll.

A similar poll on October 17 showed Mr. Giuliani enjoying a 37-point lead over his nearest rival, Mr. Thompson, a former Tennessee senator.

"Mayor Giuliani is on top of the Republican field, but losing some steam," the director of the Quinnipiac University Polling Institute, Maurice Carroll, said in a statement.

Mr. Giuliani's slide in New York comes hot on the heels of a Rasmussen poll at the end of last week showing him in third place in Florida behind Messrs. Huckabee and Romney after easily leading the field since September.

Although the mayor was never likely to win New Hampshire, where Mr. Romney has invested a great deal of time and money, Mr. Giuliani had sought to prevent the former Massachusetts governor from gaining national momentum with an easy win there.

Mr. Giuliani's gambit of leaving Mr. Huckabee to diminish Mr. Romney's early lead in Iowa, and thereby put the New Hampshire result in doubt, appears to have backfired.

The former Arkansas governor is now not only the favorite to win Iowa but is quickly gaining ground on Mr. Giuliani both in New Hampshire and in national polls, which until early December showed the mayor enjoying a substantial lead.

The Giuliani campaign is now sharply cutting advertising on Boston television stations aimed at neighboring New Hampshire. Figures reported by the Nashua Telegraph tell the scale of his retreat.

Having spent $102,745 on advertisements on WHDH on December 5, Mr. Giuliani slashed spending to $40,700 on December 11. Over the same period, the Giuliani ad spending on WFXT dropped to $20,000 a week from $67,000. On WBZ and WSBK, the Giuliani campaign has halved its spending. And the $20,300 worth of airtime bought on WLVI on December 5 was canceled six days later.

According to Campaign Media Analysis Group, Mr. Giuliani spent $1.7 million in New Hampshire between November 10 and December 9. During the same period, Mr. Romney spent $1.3 million and Mr. McCain $1.2 million.

Despite being the biggest spender on television in New Hampshire during that period, Mr. Giuliani saw his support fall away.

In the 21 New Hampshire polls between early July and December 10, Mr. Giuliani slipped below 20% five times, according to polls collated by RealClearPolitics.com. In the 11 polls taken while Mr. Giuliani was advertising heavily, he attracted less than 20% support nine times.

Put another way, between the beginning of July and early November, Mr. Giuliani polled an average of 21% in New Hampshire. In the following four weeks, when he was advertising heavily, support dropped to an average of 18%.

Mr. McCain, meanwhile, has shown a steady increase over the same period, with the RealClearPolitics poll average showing him overtaking the mayor in recent days.

An unnamed "top Giuliani aide" told Politico.com that the retreat from New Hampshire would allow the campaign "to marshal our resources for Florida and February 5, while keeping options open for changes in the early states."

Mr. Giuliani's appeal to national voters stemming from his performance in the aftermath of the terrorist attacks of September 11, 2001, has been eroded recently because of nagging doubts about his judgment.

No sooner had his former police chief, Bernard Kerik, been indicted on tax fraud and corruption charges than anomalies were reported over Mr. Giuliani's security detail as mayor.

It emerged that while courting his third wife, Judith Nathan, in the Hamptons, security was billed to obscure city agencies.
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #32 on: December 19, 2007, 07:17:29 PM »
From today's WSJ.. 125K people (who are overwhelmingly white) deciding the fate of the national politics.. talk about influence!!
--
Clinton Secret Weapon: Organization

In Iowa Campaigning, Teresa Vilmain Is Unrivaled
By JACKIE CALMES
December 19, 2007

Des Moines, Iowa

There has been a lot of attention to Hillary Clinton's recent slippage in this state, but things looked much bleaker for her earlier this year. In May, a top adviser suggested the New York senator give up competing in Iowa. Instead, she doubled down and hired Teresa Vilmain, widely seen as the gold standard among Democratic organizers in the state.

Now Sen. Clinton is counting on the organization that Ms. Vilmain has built to prevail in Iowa over rivals Barack Obama and John Edwards -- or at least come close enough to avoid limping badly into the states that quickly follow.

Ms. Vilmain first organized in Iowa in 1988, at age 29, working for eventual Democratic nominee Michael Dukakis. This time, Democrats' turnout in the state that kicks off the presidential race is expected to set a record, given excitement about the seven-candidate presidential field and the prospect of taking back the White House. More than at any time since the caucuses gained prominence 32 years ago, organizers such as Ms. Vilmain are searching for ways to draw voters who have never participated in a caucus.

The Jan. 3 event isn't the same as a regular primary election. Voters must attend a time-consuming gathering on a winter night, with open deliberations and no secret ballots.

"If she's working for you, it doesn't mean you're going to win. But regardless of the odds at the beginning, you'll be in the game," says former Gov. Tom Vilsack, who credits Ms. Vilmain for his 1998 and 2002 victories in gubernatorial elections. Mr. Vilsack enlisted her last year for his own short-lived presidential campaign. Soon after it ended, Sen. Clinton signed them both up.

Mr. Obama, an Illinois senator, and former North Carolina Sen. Edwards have seasoned state directors as well in Paul Tewes, 38, and Jennifer O'Malley Dillon, 31, respectively. But no one is quite like the 49-year-old Ms. Vilmain. Her energy in driving young staffers and candidates alike through months of 18-hour days, all the while flipping her three feet of hair, has spawned nicknames including "hummingbird on acid" and "Vil-maniac."

One admiring former colleague recalls her "jaw-dropping bluntness" in making assignments and demanding accountability. Even the candidate's spouse, an ex-president, gets put in his place, if gently. Bill Clinton, exasperated at criticism of his wife by rivals and the media, demanded at a recent debate-watching party here that Sen. Clinton start hitting back, say people who were present. Ms. Vilmain, backed by campaign co-chairman and local attorney Jerry Crawford, told the former president, who never really had to compete in Iowa's caucuses, that negative attacks aren't "the Iowa way" and would backfire.

Offsetting Ms. Vilmain's abruptness is her team-building sense of fun. She is known to organize midnight bowling or karaoke nights for campaign workers. Before a morning debate here, she showed up at the hall at 3:30 a.m. to pass out doughnuts to young volunteers putting up Clinton signs, then returned at 8 a.m. escorting the candidate.

Never married, childless and now older than most gypsy-like political organizers who move from state to state during each election, Ms. Vilmain says she was "hardwired to be organized" by her mother, Ruth. The mother of eight kept spices in alphabetical order, stored socks by color and cooked massive amounts to divvy into Tupperware containers. When family members took a container from the super-size refrigerator, they had to check an inventory list.

Mr. Vilsack likens the process of organizing his state to starting a Fortune 500 company. When Ms. Vilmain took over the Clinton operation in June, four months after Sen. Clinton's entry into the race, she devised the campaign's first business plan and set a goal, which she won't reveal, for how many Iowans she hopes will caucus for her candidate in all 99 counties, and a timetable for signing up commitments.

The total Democratic turnout in 1,781 precincts is likely to top 125,000. If Sen. Clinton can gather 50,000 supporters -- roughly 2% of Iowa's voting-age population -- advisers believe she would achieve a winning plurality. This month she opened a 36th office. With more than 100 paid staffers and volunteers, including legions of current and former Clinton aides and friends, the campaign has more than matched Sen. Obama's early advantage on the ground. The cost for the Clinton campaign alone is expected to exceed $15 million.

A calendar in Ms. Vilmain's office conference room denotes nights for caucus "dry runs," a sort of practice for precinct captains and those charged with transporting caucus-goers, decorating caucus sites and checking at the door of each church basement or school hall on caucus night for no-shows among voters who have committed to support Sen. Clinton. Weeks ago she started a statewide "Take a Buddy to Caucus" program to spur first-time caucus-goers who otherwise would be intimidated by the idea of politicking alone among strangers.

When the Clintons campaign, Ms. Vilmain usually tags along with one of them, keeping in touch with headquarters and field offices by BlackBerry but also joining younger workers at each event to press commitment cards on undecided voters. Each night, she takes to her temporary apartment a three-page "hard count" of supporters, new recruits for precinct captains and attendance at the day's campaign events or caucus-training sessions. Field operatives feed the data into computer.

By dawn, she has a consolidated trend report before the day's conference calls and meetings begin. The count tallies voters on a scale of 1 to 4 -- the 1s are supporters who have signed commitment cards, 2s have committed but not signed, 3s are the coveted undecideds and 4s support rivals.

With voters suffering "phone fatigue" from months of calls by campaigns and pollsters, the campaigns are resorting as never before to door-to-door canvassing. Ms. Vilmain has armed her soldiers with brief, humorous "Caucusing is Easy" DVDs (and videocassettes for homes without a DVD player) featuring Bill Clinton.

Being so busy, Ms. Vilmain won't get out the holiday cards that have become her trademark -- calendars with the birthdays of personal and political friends both famous and not. But she still keeps track of birthdays. Thursday was Mr. Vilsack's. It also was one of the darkest days for the campaign: a top Clinton official in New Hampshire resigned after he was quoted questioning Mr. Obama's electability given his acknowledged cocaine use as a young man.

Even as Ms. Vilmain was privately fretting about the potential damage, she had a birthday cake and gifts of political books spirited aboard the Clintons' plane for Mr. Vilsack.

Write to Jackie Calmes at jackie.calmes@wsj.com
---

So what exactly is a caucus...check this out.
..
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17261569
Caucus Calculus: A Guide to Iowa

by Ken Rudin

We keep hearing how important the "Iowa caucuses" are in determining both the Democratic and Republican nominees for president. But do we really know what a caucus is? And why Iowa?

I visited the Iowa Historical Society building in Des Moines this month with NPR Video Producer John Poole. We toured its caucus exhibit and came back with a video narration on both the history of Iowa and what takes place in a caucus. (Watch the results at left.)

Caucuses are like a neighborhood party that last for hours. In Iowa, they begin at 7 p.m. (Central) sharp. They take place in a church or a gymnasium or a school or in someone's living room. You're there with your neighbors. You discuss issues, such as Iraq or ethanol or Social Security. And you also discuss candidates.

Unlike a primary — where your vote is private — in a caucus, you declare your support for a candidate in plain view of everyone around you. Candidate Smith's supporters go to this corner of the room, candidate Jones' that corner, and so on. If no candidate at a particular caucus site receives the support of 15 percent of the attendees, his or her supporters need to form a coalition with another candidate's supporters to reach the vaunted 15 percent threshold. Otherwise, the candidate ends up with no support at all.

It's a seemingly complicated process worthy of a rocket scientist. But the results and how they are interpreted are not complicated.

Ken Rudin is NPR's political editor. He writes the weekly Political Junkie column on npr.org.
--

..and listen to this to understand the big impact of this small group..

http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=17371553
---
Historical Turnout for Democratic Caucus in Iowa

2004     124,000
2000      61,000
1996      50,000
1992      30,000
1988     126,000
1984      75,000
1980     100,000

Source: mydd.com

Just 124K people doomed Dean and paved the way for Kerry in 2004!!!
« Last Edit: December 19, 2007, 07:24:38 PM by winningnow »
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #33 on: January 01, 2008, 03:59:06 AM »
Des Moines Register final poll.. historically has been most accurate.

Good news for Obama and Huckabee. Looks like they are separating from the pack, at least in Iowa.

http://www.desmoinesregister.com/apps/pbcs.dll/article?AID=/20071231/NEWS09/71231044/1001/NEWS

Obama 32 Hillary 25 Edwards 24
Huckabee 32 Romney 26 McCain 13
---
New Iowa Poll: Obama widens lead over Clinton
Huckabee, Obama maintain leads

By THOMAS BEAUMONT
REGISTER STAFF WRITER

Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has widened his lead in Iowa over Hillary Clinton and John Edwards heading into Thursday's nominating caucuses, according to The Des Moines Register's final Iowa Poll before the 2008 nominating contests.

Obama's rise is the result in part of a dramatic influx of first-time caucusgoers, including a sizable bloc of political independents. Both groups prefer the Illinois senator in what has been a very competitive campaign.

Obama was the choice of 32 percent of likely Democratic caucusgoers, up from 28 percent in the Register's last poll in late November, while Clinton, a New York senator, held steady at 25 percent and Edwards, a former North Carolina senator, was virtually unchanged at 24 percent.

The poll reflects continued fluidity in the race even as the end of the yearlong campaign nears. Roughly a third of likely caucusgoers say they could be persuaded to choose someone else before Thursday evening. Six percent were undecided or uncommitted.

The poll also reveals a widening gap between the three-way contest for the lead and the remaining candidates. No other Democrat received support from more than 6 percent of likely caucusgoers.

The findings mark the largest lead of any of the Democratic candidates in the Register's poll all year, underscoring what has been a hard-fought battle among the three well-organized Iowa frontrunners.

It is also the only recent poll of Iowa caucusgoers showing Obama with a lead larger than the survey's margin of sampling error, which is plus or minus 3.5 percentage points.


The telephone survey of 800 likely Democratic caucusgoers was taken Dec. 27-30.

In an indication of the Obama's appeal in Iowa, Democratic caucusgoers say they prefer change and unity over other leadership characteristics. Selecting a candidate who represents a sharp departure from the status quo is 56-year-old Lansing Democrat John Rethwisch's priority, and his main reason for backing Obama.

"I have been seeing more and more something Kennedy-esque coming from Obama," said Rethwisch, Lansing's water and sewer administrator. "But it's always a gamble when you get somebody in there who hasn't got a proven track record."

Thirty percent of the poll's respondents said a candidate's ability to bring about change is the most important, followed by 27 percent who said their priority is choosing a candidate who will be the most successful in unifying the country.

Asked which candidate would do the best on these themes, caucusgoers most commonly name Obama. The first-term U.S. senator has argued in the closing weeks of the campaign that his newness to Washington, D.C., would help him bridge a politically divided nation and improve its standing overseas.

Having the experience and competence to lead, which has been the crux of Clinton's closing argument, was seen as the most important to 18 percent of caucusgoers, with Clinton as the candidate most commonly rated best on this trait.

The candidates routinely argue they are the best able to win in November, although only 6 percent of the poll's respondents identified being best able to win the general election as the top priority.

Rethwisch is also part of the majority of caucusgoers who plan to attend their first caucus Thursday. Sixty percent would be attending for the first time, reflecting the emphasis the campaigns have put on expanding the pool of participants.

All of the three leaders in Iowa draw a majority of support from new caucusgoers, although Obama benefits the most with 72 percent of his support coming from first-timers compared to 58 percent of Clinton's and 55 percent of Edwards'supporters.

Longtime Democrat Darlene Inman, 72, is a first-time caucusgoer who supports Clinton. The Mason City retired homemaker represents the heart of Clinton's support base, older women who are registered Democrats.

"She talks straight about helping everybody. She tells it like it is," Inman said.

Inman said she first motivated to participate in the caucuses because of dissatisfaction with President Bush. But she said she hesitated to back Clinton until she settled on her as the most qualified, in part because of her association former President Clinton.

"I was kind of doubtful, but then I stopped and thought that when Bill Clinton was president, jobs were plentiful and the country was running well," Inman said. "With Bush in there, it's been very worrisome and I think she can get in there and turn it around."

Clinton has made an aggressive effort to court female, first-time caucusgoers, especially younger women and those who are retired. Women account for 58 percent of caucusgoers, according to the survey.

Clinton has rebounded among female caucusgoers in general, pulling even with Obama at 32 percent after losing her edge among this key group to him in the previous Register poll.

Clinton receives more support from women 55 years old and older than her rivals, and she and Obama draw evenly from the pool of female caucusgoers between 35 and 54 years old.

However, she trails Obama badly among women under 35, with just 15 percent to his 57 percent.

Obama's advantage among younger women reflects his decided advantage among younger voters in general. A majority of caucusgoers under 35 support Obama, more than three times the support Edwards receives from them and five times Clinton's.

Caucusgoers under the age of 35 represent 17 percent of likely attendees, higher than any Register poll this year but lower than any other age group.

Clinton led narrowly in the Register's October poll, but slipped in the survey taken in late November. During that period Obama and Edwards sharpened their criticism of Clinton, who has led in national polls of Democratic preference. Likewise, Clinton went on the attack in November, questioning Obama's experience and characterizing his health care proposal as less than comprehensive.

Clinton remains the favorite of the party faithful, with support from a third of self-described Democrats. However, Obama is the clear choice of caucusgoers who affiliate with neither the Democrat or Republican parties, with roughly 40 percent of them backing him in the survey.

The support from non-Democrats is significant because a whopping 40 percent of those planning to attend described themselves as independent and another 5 percent as Republican. Only registered Democrats can participate in the caucuses, although rules allow participants to change their party registration on their way in to the caucuses.

Edwards' support has changed little since the last poll, when he was the choice of 23 percent of likely caucusgoers. He led the Register's May poll with 29 percent.

He remained the choice of older men and drew evenly with Clinton from caucusgoers 55 and older.

One such Democrat, 84-year-old Ruth Paulsen of Milford, said Edwards' charisma and message of economic fairness appeals to her.

"I like the way he speaks, with energy and enthusiasm," said Paulsen. "The others are all right, but I like Edwards because he talks the most about change."

Despite aggressive campaigns in Iowa by Delaware Sen. Joe Biden, Connecticut Sen. Chris Dodd and New Mexico Gov. Bill Richardson, none has been able to break into the pack at the top. In fact, support for Biden and Richardson slipped somewhat in the new poll.

An analysis of likely caucusgoers' second choices showed that the results would change little if the votes for the lower-rated candidates were redistributed among the front-runners.

Reporter Thomas Beaumont can be reached at (515) 286-2532 or tbeaumont@dmreg.com.


Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #34 on: January 04, 2008, 03:02:16 AM »
Hate to rain on Obama's party after Iowa win ..but if he wins the nomination...Democrats will lose the general election.

You read it first here!!
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #35 on: January 06, 2008, 11:43:17 AM »
Is the US electorate changing??

--
Morley Winograd is co-author with Michael D. Hais of Millennial Makeover: MySpace, YouTube and the Future of American Politics.

Despite all their efforts to put a positive spin on their Iowa showing on the plane to New Hampshire, the Clinton team couldn't avoid acknowledging the most important mistake they made in Iowa--discounting the youth vote.

Not only did Clinton lose to Barack Obama by an almost six to one margin among Millennial Generation (those under 25) caucus attendees, but also her weakness in this age group was the key to her overall loss among women. While Hillary carried the over 45 female vote 36%-24%, Obama won women under 45 by a 50%-21% margin and the surprisingly strong turnout among young caucus goers turned that margin into an overall defeat among the female constituency Hillary was counting on the most. Had she and her team only read their history, they wouldn't have been surprised by this outcome.

Every eighty years a "Civic" generation, like the GI Generation and now the Millennials, comes along with a determination to use their size and their facility with communication technology to change the political culture of America. 2008 will be the first election when Millennials, the largest generation in American history, born between 1982 and 2003, will be eligible to vote in sufficient numbers to tip the political scales to candidates who they favor, but they have already made their presence known to those analyzing election data, not just the latest poll results. They, along with the last remaining members of the GI Generation, were the only age groups to cast majority votes for John Kerry in 2004. The YouTube inspired involvement of Millennials in the Senate races in Virginia and Montana was the difference in those two close elections, returning Democrats to majority status in 2006. But those initial tremors are minor compared to the tsunami of change that Millennials will set in motion in the 2008 elections.

Jaded pollsters, like Clinton's Mark Penn, and columnists, like Thomas L. Friedman, who have been waiting for the emergence of a sizeable youth vote and youthful activism for decades, completely ignored this emerging phenomenon believing that today's youth would disappoint those hoping for any sign of political commitment, just as people under 25 had done ever since the 1970s. But that attitude, common among Baby Boomers who believe the entire world should think and act the way they do, represents a significant misreading of history.  Gen Xers, who adored and still revere Ronald Reagan and distrust government, were responsible for the decline in voter participation among young people in the 1980s and 1990s, but as studies by Harvard's Institute of Politics have demonstrated, ever since 9/11 today's youth have voted in increasing numbers, at a growth rate that surpasses that of all other generations. Now that they have a candidate like Barack Obama who appeals to this generation's partisan passion for changing America, their impact will reverberate across the country as loudly as it did in Iowa last week.

A careful observer of the Obama and Clinton campaigns' youth turnout efforts could have seen the results coming. Hillary's team were told to invite young people over for a night of watching TV shows like Gray's Anatomy or The Office, and use that opportunity to engage them in a conversation on the issues. Obama's team went about finding its cadre of supporters by using their website, built off of the FaceBook operating system or platform, in tune with Millennial's social networking habits. Once they found potential supporters, Obama's team didn't ask them to watch television, something Millennials do infrequently, unless it's on their laptop with shows downloaded from the Net, but to hang out at the local bar. There Michelle Obama, or "the closer" as her husband calls her, asked them to come out on caucus night and change America's politics forever.

Clinton's attempt to make her gender define the nature of the historic change in this election missed another important trait of Millennials. This generation is the most gender neutral, race-and ethnicity-blind group of young people in American history. Only sixty percent of Millennials are white; twenty percent have an immigrant parent; and, ninety percent have a friend of another race. While Baby Boomers are justifiably proud of their idealistic efforts on behalf of civil rights and women's rights, Millennials take diversity as a given and tolerance as the only acceptable behavior. That's why, on caucus night, young women voted for Obama and his message of hope, while older women felt motivated to support the first credible female candidate for President.  Once again, the Clinton's circle of Boomer advisors just couldn't understand why everyone wasn't thinking and behaving like they did. .

The generational differences in the two candidate's teams were embarrassingly obvious during their speeches to their supporters on caucus night. A collection of Silent and Boomer Generation former leaders, from Madeline Albright to Wesley Clark, not to mention Bill Clinton, was planted behind Hillary. Obama's backdrop was his kids, his wife and throngs of young supporters who knew that their efforts had created an historic moment for the country. Given this generational bias, really a blind spot in their thinking, it's hard to believe Hillary can fix her problem with Millennials before the final campaign showdown on February 5, let alone in the few days between Iowa and New Hampshire. But if she can't find a way to appeal to this emerging generation quickly and on its own terms, she will become the first, but certainly not the last, candidate whose failure to recognize the historical pattern of generational cycles in American politics has cost them their future. 

Morley Winograd is co-author with Michael D. Hais of Millennial Makeover: MySpace, YouTube and the Future of American Politics (Rutgers University Press, March 2008)

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/1/5/223227/6768
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity

openforum

  • One Day Star
  • ***
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 417
  • Money: 1000.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #36 on: January 07, 2008, 06:55:11 AM »
Is the US electorate changing??

--
Morley Winograd is co-author with Michael D. Hais of Millennial Makeover: MySpace, YouTube and the Future of American Politics.

Despite all their efforts to put a positive spin on their Iowa showing on the plane to New Hampshire, the Clinton team couldn't avoid acknowledging the most important mistake they made in Iowa--discounting the youth vote.

Not only did Clinton lose to Barack Obama by an almost six to one margin among Millennial Generation (those under 25) caucus attendees, but also her weakness in this age group was the key to her overall loss among women. While Hillary carried the over 45 female vote 36%-24%, Obama won women under 45 by a 50%-21% margin and the surprisingly strong turnout among young caucus goers turned that margin into an overall defeat among the female constituency Hillary was counting on the most. Had she and her team only read their history, they wouldn't have been surprised by this outcome.

Every eighty years a "Civic" generation, like the GI Generation and now the Millennials, comes along with a determination to use their size and their facility with communication technology to change the political culture of America. 2008 will be the first election when Millennials, the largest generation in American history, born between 1982 and 2003, will be eligible to vote in sufficient numbers to tip the political scales to candidates who they favor, but they have already made their presence known to those analyzing election data, not just the latest poll results. They, along with the last remaining members of the GI Generation, were the only age groups to cast majority votes for John Kerry in 2004. The YouTube inspired involvement of Millennials in the Senate races in Virginia and Montana was the difference in those two close elections, returning Democrats to majority status in 2006. But those initial tremors are minor compared to the tsunami of change that Millennials will set in motion in the 2008 elections.

Jaded pollsters, like Clinton's Mark Penn, and columnists, like Thomas L. Friedman, who have been waiting for the emergence of a sizeable youth vote and youthful activism for decades, completely ignored this emerging phenomenon believing that today's youth would disappoint those hoping for any sign of political commitment, just as people under 25 had done ever since the 1970s. But that attitude, common among Baby Boomers who believe the entire world should think and act the way they do, represents a significant misreading of history.  Gen Xers, who adored and still revere Ronald Reagan and distrust government, were responsible for the decline in voter participation among young people in the 1980s and 1990s, but as studies by Harvard's Institute of Politics have demonstrated, ever since 9/11 today's youth have voted in increasing numbers, at a growth rate that surpasses that of all other generations. Now that they have a candidate like Barack Obama who appeals to this generation's partisan passion for changing America, their impact will reverberate across the country as loudly as it did in Iowa last week.

A careful observer of the Obama and Clinton campaigns' youth turnout efforts could have seen the results coming. Hillary's team were told to invite young people over for a night of watching TV shows like Gray's Anatomy or The Office, and use that opportunity to engage them in a conversation on the issues. Obama's team went about finding its cadre of supporters by using their website, built off of the FaceBook operating system or platform, in tune with Millennial's social networking habits. Once they found potential supporters, Obama's team didn't ask them to watch television, something Millennials do infrequently, unless it's on their laptop with shows downloaded from the Net, but to hang out at the local bar. There Michelle Obama, or "the closer" as her husband calls her, asked them to come out on caucus night and change America's politics forever.

Clinton's attempt to make her gender define the nature of the historic change in this election missed another important trait of Millennials. This generation is the most gender neutral, race-and ethnicity-blind group of young people in American history. Only sixty percent of Millennials are white; twenty percent have an immigrant parent; and, ninety percent have a friend of another race. While Baby Boomers are justifiably proud of their idealistic efforts on behalf of civil rights and women's rights, Millennials take diversity as a given and tolerance as the only acceptable behavior. That's why, on caucus night, young women voted for Obama and his message of hope, while older women felt motivated to support the first credible female candidate for President.  Once again, the Clinton's circle of Boomer advisors just couldn't understand why everyone wasn't thinking and behaving like they did. .

The generational differences in the two candidate's teams were embarrassingly obvious during their speeches to their supporters on caucus night. A collection of Silent and Boomer Generation former leaders, from Madeline Albright to Wesley Clark, not to mention Bill Clinton, was planted behind Hillary. Obama's backdrop was his kids, his wife and throngs of young supporters who knew that their efforts had created an historic moment for the country. Given this generational bias, really a blind spot in their thinking, it's hard to believe Hillary can fix her problem with Millennials before the final campaign showdown on February 5, let alone in the few days between Iowa and New Hampshire. But if she can't find a way to appeal to this emerging generation quickly and on its own terms, she will become the first, but certainly not the last, candidate whose failure to recognize the historical pattern of generational cycles in American politics has cost them their future. 

Morley Winograd is co-author with Michael D. Hais of Millennial Makeover: MySpace, YouTube and the Future of American Politics (Rutgers University Press, March 2008)

http://www.mydd.com/story/2008/1/5/223227/6768



Good article WN...

Looks like the baby boomer generation's influence is fast fading...
Logged

ruchir

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 8,667
  • Money: 1153342.00
  • WC03 Final - Ganguly is in pain after a fall
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #37 on: April 17, 2008, 02:18:25 PM »
Anyone watched the Hill-Obama debate on ABC yesterday? I did. Obama was taken to cleaners by ABC's hosts. Watch the replay here: http://www.youdecide2008.com/2008/04/17/video-abc-clintonobama-debate-from-philadelphia-pa/

Man, BO's true color showed up. Had no answers whatsoever for any tough questions, except hemming and hawing.
Logged

LosingNow

  • Team of the Century
  • *****
  • Offline Offline
  • Posts: 24,023
  • Money: 1516105.00
Re: US 2008 Presidential Politics Thread
« Reply #38 on: April 17, 2008, 02:27:27 PM »
Anyone watched the Hill-Obama debate on ABC yesterday? I did. Obama was taken to cleaners by ABC's hosts. Watch the replay here: http://www.youdecide2008.com/2008/04/17/video-abc-clintonobama-debate-from-philadelphia-pa/

Man, BO's true color showed up. Had no answers whatsoever for any tough questions, except hemming and hawing.


Yep.. ABC cleaned his clock.

http://www.cricketvoice.com/cricketforum2/index.php/topic,14723.msg204769.html#msg204769
Logged
Play with heart. Win with class. Lose with dignity
Pages: [1]   Go Up
 


Related Topics
Subject Started by Replies Views Last post
US 2008 Presidential Primaries : Democratic Nomination : IOWA
The World Report
LosingNow 53 2011 Last post January 09, 2008, 05:28:01 AM
by ruchir
US 2008 Presidential Primaries : Republican Nomination : IOWA
The World Report
LosingNow 48 2288 Last post January 11, 2008, 05:37:14 AM
by openforum
IPL 2008 - Match 28 : DD vs CSK- Thread
Cricket Match Threads
LosingNow 230 5249 Last post May 09, 2008, 06:22:01 PM
by gouravk
IPL 2008 - Match 29 : KKR vs BRC- Thread
Cricket Match Threads
LosingNow 318 7450 Last post May 09, 2008, 04:33:29 PM
by justforkix
Wimbledon 2008 Thread
Other Sports
poondu 189 5665 Last post July 08, 2008, 06:18:20 AM
by kban1
1st presidential debate.. discussion thread
The World Report
LosingNow 86 3717 Last post September 28, 2008, 12:00:16 PM
by prfsr
Third and last presidential debate
The World Report
prfsr 3 613 Last post October 16, 2008, 07:12:25 PM
by prfsr